session_visual_info

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It states that the tool returns a log path and watch command, but gives no details about error handling, prerequisites (e.g., session must be active), or whether it has side effects. For a simple read-only getter this is passable but incomplete.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and object, and no unnecessary words. It efficiently communicates the core functionality.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a low-complexity tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the primary retrieval purpose but lacks details on return value structure, potential errors, or preconditions. It is adequate for basic selection but not fully self-contained.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema defines a single string parameter 'session_id' with 0% description coverage. The description references 'a session' but does not explain the parameter's expected format, meaning, or role, leaving the agent to infer the obvious identifier semantics from the parameter name.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses the specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource: 'live log path and watch command for a session'. The purpose clause 'so users can open output visually' clarifies intent and distinguishes this from sibling tools like run_command or command_status.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies when to use this tool (when a user needs to view session output visually) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. The context is clear enough for selection, though exclusions are absent.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.