lb_search_sessions

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

The wording is consistent with the readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false annotations, and it adds the small behavioral detail that status is included in the result. Since annotations already cover the read-only and non-destructive traits, the description adds only minimal behavioral context.

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 clean sentence with no filler, front-loading the core purpose and the key output detail. Every word contributes meaning.

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 parameterless, read-only listing tool, the description provides the essential information: what is listed and what aspect is reported. It could add more detail about what 'status' values or session scope look like, but this is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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 has zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so the description bears no real burden for parameter semantics. The baseline of 4 applies here because nothing about parameters needs clarification.

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 states a specific verb, resource, and focus: 'List search sessions and their status.' It clearly separates this from sibling tools like lb_search_start, lb_search_read, and lb_search_cancel because this one is about listing sessions rather than performing an operation.

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 intended use is implied: use this tool when you need an overview of search sessions and their statuses. However, it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling search tools or state when not to use it.

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