kopern_list_sessions

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, which already signals non-destructive behavior. The description adds the notable trait 'No LLM cost', which is useful. However, it does not disclose whether results are paginated, sorted, or filtered beyond the limit parameter.

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 very concise with two short sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the function and highlighting a cost characteristic. It is front-loaded and avoids redundancy.

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 list tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and a key behavioral note (no LLM cost). However, it lacks details on pagination, sorting, or how to interpret the returned fields, leaving some gaps for an agent.

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 schema already describes both parameters (agent_id, limit) with their types and defaults. The description adds no additional semantic information about the parameters; it only lists output fields, which are not part of the input schema.

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 tool lists conversation sessions for an agent and enumerates the fields shown (purpose, source, token usage, cost, timestamps). It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'kopern_get_session' by indicating it returns a list rather than a single session, but does not explicitly contrast with other 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'kopern_get_session' or 'kopern_get_usage'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or scenarios where listing sessions is inappropriate.

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