get_session_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It adds real value by stating the ordering convention ('oldest terminal first') and that statuses are live, which the schema does not convey. It still omits any read-only confirmation, error behavior, or permission requirements, so it is only partially 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?

It is a single short clause with no filler and the content is front-loaded, which is efficient. But it reads as an under-specified fragment rather than a complete statement, so brevity comes at some cost to clarity.

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 not be spelled out, and the description adds the ordering detail. For a simple one-parameter read tool it is nearly adequate, but the total absence of parameter and usage context leaves gaps.

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 0% for the single session_name parameter, and the description never mentions it. No format, naming convention, or expected value shape is given, so the description fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 names the resource (a session plus every terminal in it) and its content (live statuses), which is informative. However, it is a verbless noun phrase, so the actual action (retrieve) is only inferred, and it does not distinguish itself from siblings like get_terminal_status or list_sessions. Purpose is conveyed but not sharply stated.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as list_sessions or get_terminal_status. The agent gets no signal about which sibling to prefer in a given situation.

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