Group related tasks, such as working on the users api, into a single session. Use the resulting session ID to delegate complex work across coding agents.
Start a session to group related tasks (e.g. "users api"). Pass its session_id to delegate.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | Yes | what this piece of work is, e.g. users api |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | Yes | ||
| session_id | Yes | pass to delegate to group tasks |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the session yields a session_id intended for delegate, but says nothing about session lifetime, whether titles must be unique, or whether duplicate sessions are created on repeated calls.
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?
Two short sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded and the downstream handoff stated second. Nothing here is redundant or padded.
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 needn't be explained, and the single parameter is fully covered in the schema. What's left unsaid is session lifecycle and its relation to delete_session, a modest gap for such a small tool.
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?
Only one parameter and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents title fully. The description's example ("users api") reinforces the grouping intent but adds no syntax or constraint details beyond what the schema states.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ("Start a session") plus the reason it exists ("group related tasks"), with a concrete example. It hints at the relationship to delegate, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings like delete_session or the list_* tools.
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?
Gives clear context for when this applies — grouping related tasks under a titled session — and tells the agent the next step by pointing at delegate. It stops short of explicit exclusions (e.g. when not to create a new session versus reusing an existing one).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.