Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• sensing_get_statusA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a read-only operation (getting status) but does not explicitly confirm no side effects, permissions needed, or return format. Minimal transparency beyond the action itself.

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

  Conciseness5/5

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

  The description is exceptionally concise with two short sentences, no filler, and front-loaded with the key action. Every word adds value.

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

  Completeness3/5

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

  For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers basic purpose but lacks detail on what the status contains or how the buffer works, which may be needed for debugging. Adequate but not thorough.

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

  Parameters3/5

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

  Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already describes the single parameter 'session_id' as a session identifier. The description adds nothing beyond restating that it applies 'for a session', providing no new semantic detail.

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

  Purpose5/5

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

  The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'status of the Sensing buffer for a session'. It distinguishes from sibling tools (end, record, start) by focusing on status retrieval, and provides context for use ('useful for debugging').

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

  Usage Guidelines2/5

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

  The description offers only a vague usage hint ('useful for debugging') without specifying when to use this tool over siblings or any exclusions. There is no comparative guidance or condition for use.

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

• sensing_end_sessionA
  4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It discloses the side effect (flush-on-close hook shipping buffered turns), which is valuable beyond what the input schema provides. However, it does not mention idempotency or error states, which would push it to a 5.

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

  Conciseness5/5

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

  The description is two sentences with no unnecessary words. The first sentence immediately states the purpose, and the second provides necessary behavioral detail. Every sentence earns its place.

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

  Completeness4/5

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

  Given no output schema and no annotations, the description explains the core action and side effects adequately. It is missing details on return values or potential errors, but for a simple end-session tool, the current description is reasonably complete. A 5 would require explicit return information.

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

  Parameters3/5

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

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already described in the schema. The description adds no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema states (e.g., 'Optional brief summary' is identical). Baseline is 3, and there is no justification to raise it.

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

  Purpose5/5

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

  The description clearly states the verb ('Signal the end') and resource ('Claude Code session') and explains the triggering of a flush-on-close hook. It distinguishes from siblings like sensing_start_session (which starts a session) and sensing_record_turn (which records turns), leaving no ambiguity about the tool's role.

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

  Usage Guidelines3/5

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

  The description implies use at session closure but provides no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives, such as when not to use it or prerequisites (e.g., session must be started). An agent can infer from context, but the lack of explicit statements lowers the score from a 4.

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

• sensing_start_sessionA
  4.2/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries full weight. It discloses that the tool returns a project summary and a session id, and notes that session_id generation is server-side. However, it doesn't mention potential side effects (e.g., creating records) or error states, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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

  Conciseness5/5

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

  The description is two sentences: the first states purpose and return, the second provides session_id guidance. It is front-loaded, contains no filler, and every sentence earns its place.

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

  Completeness4/5

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

  Given 3 parameters, no output schema, and moderate complexity, the description sufficiently explains the tool's role and key behaviors (return of summary and id). It could elaborate on the summary content, but is adequate for an agent to use correctly.

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

  Parameters4/5

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

  The input schema covers all 3 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds value by explaining that session_id may be omitted for server generation and that the returned id must be used in sibling calls, which is not in the schema. This extra context improves parameter understanding.

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

  Purpose5/5

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

  The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Signal the start of a new Claude Code session.' It uses a specific verb ('signal') and resource ('session'), and distinguishes it from siblings like sensing_end_session and sensing_record_turn by specifying it is called once at the beginning.

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

  Usage Guidelines4/5

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

  The description says 'Call this once at the beginning of every session,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It also explains that session_id can be omitted, and that the returned id should be used with sibling tools. It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is sufficient.

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

• sensing_record_turnA
  4.7/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool survives server restarts and returns a topic shift flag. However, it could elaborate on persistence guarantees or error scenarios.

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

  Conciseness5/5

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

  Three tightly written sentences with zero waste. Each sentence adds distinct value: purpose/frequency, cross-session behavior, return value and follow-up action. Front-loaded with the core action.

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

  Completeness5/5

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

  Given no output schema, the description explains the return value (topic shift boolean) and its implication. It also clarifies the purpose of less obvious parameters like injected_memory_ids. Sibling tool names provide context for the tool's role in a workflow.

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

  Parameters4/5

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

  Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions, but the description adds useful context: session_id origin, sequence starting at 1, files_touched as files read/modified, injected_memory_ids for feedback scoring. This enhances understanding beyond schema alone.

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

  Purpose5/5

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

  The description clearly states the verb 'record' and the resource 'completed conversation turn', specifying its content (user message + Claude reply). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (sensing_start_session, sensing_end_session, sensing_get_status) by focusing on recording individual turns rather than session lifecycle.

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

  Usage Guidelines5/5

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

  Explicitly says 'Call this after every exchange', providing clear when-to-use guidance. Also advises to keep the same session_id across server restarts and explains the conditional follow-up (if topic shift detected, call context injection tool).

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