ora_session_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool 'creates a summary' but does not describe side effects, persistence, permissions, or whether the summary is stored or returned. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely writes data.

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 consists of two short sentences in French, each with a distinct purpose: the first defines the tool's function, the second gives usage guidance. No extraneous information is present, achieving high conciseness.

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?

The description adequately covers the tool's basic purpose and usage. However, without an output schema, the agent does not know what the tool returns (e.g., a confirmation or the created summary). Additionally, the description does not clarify whether the summary is saved or how it integrates with the session context, leaving some ambiguity.

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 descriptions already cover all parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional semantic value beyond what the schema provides, e.g., it does not explain how 'topics' or 'project_path' relate to the session summary.

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 creates a summary of the current work session and specifies when to call it ('at the end of a productive session'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ora_capture_note, which are for individual notes rather than session summaries.

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 explicitly indicates when to use the tool ('at the end of a productive session'), providing clear context. However, it does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, which would further strengthen guidance.

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