Retrieve the formatted state and metrics of a live session using its session ID. Check progress, logs, and errors for long-running operations.
Retourne l'etat formate complet d'une session (avec metriques).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| session_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It mentions that metrics are included in a formatted state, but says nothing about permission requirements, behavior when the session_id does not exist, or whether reads are side-effect free.
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?
A single short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and the returned resource. No wasted words, though it is arguably too terse given the missing guidance.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but for a heavily-sibling-ed tool with a 0%-documented parameter and no annotations, the definition is under-specified. It omits when-to-use, parameter meaning, and error behavior.
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 single parameter session_id is undocumented in both schema and description. The description refers to 'une session' but never explains what session_id is (format, source, or how to obtain it), so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.
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 states a clear verb and resource ('Retourne l'etat formate complet d'une session') and adds scope detail ('avec metriques'), so it is more than a restatement of the name. However, it offers no differentiation from the many siblings (tracking_list, tracking_templates, tracking_get vs tracking_update), leaving the agent to infer which read tool to pick.
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 rather than tracking_list or tracking_templates, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated. The only implied usage is that it requires a session_id, which comes from the schema, not the description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.