list_sessions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions pagination and that sessions carry counts, which are useful behavioral traits. However, it lacks details on rate limits, authentication requirements, or error conditions, making it moderately transparent.

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 two sentences long, front-loading the purpose and structure in the first sentence and adding a use case in the second. Every sentence contributes value without 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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists key data fields (browser/OS/device, geo, visit/view/event counts), providing sufficient context for a listing tool. It covers the main parameters (date range, pagination) but could mention the search and size parameters more explicitly.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about the date range and pagination, but does not go beyond the schema's parameter descriptions in adding new meaning. It does not explain the 'search' parameter or format expectations in more detail.

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 it lists individual visitor sessions for a website over a date range, paginated, and specifies the data each session carries (browser/OS/device, geo, visit/view/event counts). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like session_detail or explore_event_data, slightly reducing clarity.

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 a use case ('Use it to answer per-visitor questions'), which gives some guidance on when to use the tool. However, it does not mention when not to use it or provide alternatives, leaving gaps in usage guidance.

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