sca_session_show

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

The description discloses the possible return values (waiting, allow, deny) and token expiration after 15 minutes. Without annotations, it provides key behavioral context for a status-checking tool, though it does not mention idempotency or rate limits.

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 two sentences, front-loads the purpose, and every sentence adds value: stating the verb/resource, usage instructions, and return behavior. No wasted words.

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 simple polling tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains return values, token expiration, and usage context. It is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 sole parameter 'token' is described in the schema as 'SCA session token from a prior SCA-required response'. The description adds minimal extra context (mentioning the token source) but the schema already covers the meaning well, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool shows the status of an SCA session, specifies it polls a token from a previous call, and lists possible return values. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which deal with other entities like accounts, transfers, etc.

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 explicitly instructs to use this for polling an SCA session token from a prior call. It implies the context of use but does not provide explicit exclusions or alternatives; however, given the unique functionality, this is sufficient.

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