rybbit_get_session_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states content scope and fails to mention pagination, filtering via minutes, or response structure. The phrase 'all events' conflicts with the schema's page/limit/offset parameters, potentially misleading agents into thinking pagination is unnecessary—a notable transparency gap.

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 concise sentence (13 words) that is front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every word contributes to the purpose, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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?

Without an output schema, the description should compensate by explaining return format, pagination behavior, and how optional parameters shape results. It only states 'detailed information' and 'all events and pageviews,' leaving the agent to guess about pagination, event ordering, and response fields. Given the tool's complexity (6 params, no output schema), this is insufficient.

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 all six parameters already have descriptions. The tool description adds little beyond that—it vaguely relates to 'events and pageviews' but does not explain how each parameter behaves or affects results. This meets the baseline for good schema coverage without adding extra semantic value.

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 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'detailed information about a specific session, clearly distinguishing it from list-oriented siblings like rybbit_get_sessions or rybbit_get_session_locations. It also mentions content scope ('including all events and pageviews'), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 phrase 'specific session' implies when to use this tool versus list or location-focused tools, providing clear context for the intended use case. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a full 5.

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