remote_session_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a read-only list operation and that only active, named sessions are included, along with health status. However, it does not explain what 'health' means or address pagination or error states, leaving some behavioral uncertainty.

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 sentence of eight words, with the key verb 'List' front-loaded. It includes the essential qualifier 'active' and the health aspect without any wasted words.

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 operation with no parameters and an output schema available, the description is complete enough. It covers scope (active named sessions) and the health component; return values are covered by the output schema, so no further detail is required.

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?

There are zero parameters in the schema, so no parameter details are needed. The schema coverage is trivially 100%, and per the rubric, 0 params merits a baseline of 4.

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 'List' and identifies a distinct resource 'active named sessions' along with the additional context 'their health.' This clearly differentiates it from sibling session tools like remote_session_open and remote_session_close, and from other list tools like remote_profile_list.

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 implies its use case (listing sessions) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or other session management tools, but the name and description make the primary purpose clear enough for an agent to infer.

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