List Claude history sessions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the tool lists recent sessions, orders them newest first, and covers multiple sources. It does not mention rate limits or output format, but for a list tool the behavioral disclosure is adequate.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Every sentence provides value (purpose, usage example, link to get_session).

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?

With 3 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose, usage context, and ordering. It lacks a hint about the return format (e.g., session IDs, timestamps), but the context is largely complete for an agent to decide to use it.

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 67% (source and project described, limit missing description). The tool description does not add further semantic meaning beyond the schema; it relies on schema for limit constraints and source/project descriptions, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('list') and resource ('local Claude sessions'), specifies ordering ('newest first'), and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning its use for finding a session ID to pass to get_session.

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 description explicitly states when to use it ('reviewing what you worked on today/this week' or 'find a session ID to pass to get_session'), providing clear context. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or directly compare to search_history, but the sibling tool names imply differentiation.

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