session-revisit

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only and non-destructive, but the description adds important behavioral details: it persists a linked child record, requires persistence, and returns a JSON envelope or error. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise with four sentences, each adding value: core action, requirements and process, return format, and error case. Front-loaded with the essential purpose.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description covers all necessary context: the action, prerequisites, side effects, return format, and error conditions. Sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add new information about parameters beyond what the schema provides; the schema already includes good descriptions for both sessionId and cwd.

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 ('Re-run a persisted session's ORIGINAL question with the CURRENT providers/config'), the resource ('persisted session'), and differentiates from siblings like session-get by mentioning linking via parentId and the requirement for persistence.

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 indicates when to use (to re-run a session with current config) and notes prerequisites (sessions.persist must be on), but does not explicitly contrast with other tools in the sibling list beyond stating it uses the original tool path.

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