session-annotate

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden. It discloses the mutation nature ('writes') and the requirement for persistence permission, but does not cover potential side effects, rate limits, or detailed data handling. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 with no extraneous information. The first sentence immediately conveys the core action, and the second adds key context. It is well-structured and efficient.

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 tool with two string parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and a critical requirement. However, it omits expected return behavior (e.g., acknowledgment or updated audit trail) and parameter format hints, leaving gaps for an agent to infer.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It implies the note parameter is 'freeform' and ties it to the audit trail, and the sessionId is the target session. However, it lacks details on format, constraints, or examples, leaving significant ambiguity for the agent.

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 action ('Append a freeform note') and the target ('persisted session's audit trail'). It is specific and distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like session-get and session-revisit, which deal with retrieval rather than modification.

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 provides a necessary precondition ('Requires sessions.persist') and mentions the write location ('local session store'). However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, though the sibling tools are distinct in purpose.

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