Session Info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only that the target is a specific session and what fields are returned, without confirming auth needs, data freshness (live vs historical), or failure behavior.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb, resource, and return fields first, followed by the enum legend. No filler and nothing redundant.

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 explained, and annotations cover safety. However, for a lookup tool surrounded by many session-related siblings, the description omits the routing guidance and the format of required parameters that would make it fully self-sufficient.

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%, so the description must compensate. It decodes the 'session' parameter values (R=Race, Q=Quali, FP1), which is genuinely useful, but leaves 'year' and 'gp' formats unexplained—e.g. whether gp is a name, code, or round number.

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 ('Get') and resource ('session') and names the returned fields (start time, status), so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not differentiate from close siblings such as get_session_summary, get_live_session_status, or get_race_info, leaving overlap unresolved.

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 guidance on when to choose this over alternatives like get_session_summary or get_live_session_status. The only contextual cue is that a session must be named within a year/GP, which is implied rather than stated as a usage rule.

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