session_start

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It does add some behavioral context: the session is 'tracked', 'local-memory', and an ID is returned. However, it does not disclose side effects, lifecycle expectations, or whether starting a session has persistent consequences.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded, information-dense sentence. Every word contributes to the core purpose and expected return value, with no filler or redundancy.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description is incomplete for a tool with five parameters, no annotation coverage, and no usage guidance. It lacks parameter semantics and fails to explain the role of a local-memory session within the broader tool set.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no meaning for any of the five parameters, including the required agent_name and project_key. The optional goal, branch, and workspace parameters are entirely unexplained, so an agent cannot infer how to populate them.

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 clearly states the verb ('Start'), the resource ('tracked local-memory session'), and the key output ('return its session ID'). It is specific enough to be understood, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like session_end or memory_checkpoint.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites, and no indication of what happens before or after starting a session. The description implies it is the entry point, but it never states that explicitly.

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