dsh_get_session_stats

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

The description adds useful detail by calling the projections 'cached', implying the data may not be real-time, and lists the fields returned. However, it does not disclose error behavior, session existence requirements, or explicitly confirm read-only semantics (though 'Fetch' implies it). With no annotations, the description partially but inadequately carries the transparency burden.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and key specifics. No filler or redundancy, every word contributes to understanding.

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 getter, the description covers the basic purpose and lists fields, but given there is no output schema, it does not explain what the projections mean or how they behave (e.g., staleness, availability). Usage context vs. alternatives is also missing, leaving the tool functional but not fully self-contained.

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 input schema provides only a type for session_id with 0% description coverage. The description mentions 'for a DSH session', which clarifies the parameter's reference, but does not explain the expected format, source, or how to obtain a valid session_id. It fails to compensate for the lack of schema-level description.

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 action ('Fetch') and the target ('cached projections for a DSH session'), naming specific fields (tokenUsage, sessionStats, contextPressure). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like dsh_create_session and dsh_send_message, which are write/action operations.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when a session is active vs. cached, or when to call it in a workflow. The description lacks any context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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