Retrieve a snapshot of a session to inspect its recorded judgments and decision state. Use it to review what happened during a speech or text submission.
Return a session snapshot.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| session_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
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. 'Return a snapshot' implies a non-mutating read, but it does not disclose whether the snapshot is live, cached, point-in-time, or subject to authentication or rate-limit constraints. This adds minimal behavioral insight beyond the tool name.
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 a single concise sentence with no irrelevant content. However, the brevity is closer to under-specification than effective structure, since it omits usage and behavioral context.
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?
With no annotations and a one-line description, the definition is incomplete for an agent that must decide when to invoke this tool. The output schema covers return shape, but the description still lacks a clear use case, behavioral expectations, and any reference to sibling tools for selection.
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%, so the description needed to compensate for the lone session_id parameter. 'Return a session snapshot' only hints that session_id identifies the session, but it does not explain the expected format, uniqueness, or how the parameter affects the returned snapshot.
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 uses a specific verb ('Return') and a recognizable resource ('a session snapshot'), making it clear this is a read operation for a session. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like interpret_transcript, but the core purpose is still clear.
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 get_session versus interpret_transcript or list_captures. The description provides no use-case context, exclusions, or alternative routing, leaving the agent to infer selection from the tool name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.