rad_list_sessions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The word 'active' adds real behavioral context beyond annotations — closed or terminated sessions are excluded from results — and 'this MCP service's' scopes the result set to server-owned sessions. It does not say what happens when no sessions exist or whether results are ordered/paginated.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The scope qualifier is placed before the noun it modifies, so an agent reads the key constraint first.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and annotations cover the safety profile. For a zero-parameter list tool the description is nearly sufficient; only the expected empty-result behavior and any tie-in to session-handle-consuming siblings like rad_attach are absent.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the schema or the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies; no parameter guidance is needed or missing.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'List ... active debug sessions.' That is clearly distinct from rad_create_session and rad_close_session, and from rad_list_processes, which returns processes rather than sessions. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling it might be confused with, so a 4 rather than a 5.

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 statement of when to call this versus alternatives (e.g. before rad_attach or rad_select_context to find a session handle), and no prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is only inferable from the verb 'List.'

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