knowl_session_finish

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

Annotations provide only openWorldHint=false, so the description carries most of the behavioral burden. It discloses the potentially harmful consequence of finishing a hook-owned session and clarifies that 'failed' status still records learning via the schema. It does not describe output behavior, but that is less critical here.

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 with no filler. The key scoping condition ('you explicitly own') is front-loaded, and the warning about hook-owned sessions is placed exactly where it adds value.

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 tool with four well-described parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential contextual distinction: manual ownership vs hook ownership. It could mention the effect of 'promote' more explicitly, but the schema already documents that parameter.

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%, and each parameter already has a clear description. The tool description adds context around 'own' and 'promote', but it does not add meaningful semantics beyond the schema, 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?

Description states a specific verb ('Finish') and resource ('manual memory session you explicitly own') and further clarifies the optional 'promote' behavior. It also distinguishes this tool from hook-owned session handling, making it easy to differentiate from sibling tools.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: manual sessions you own. It also clearly says when not to use it (hook-owned sessions), explaining that lifecycle hooks finalize themselves. No explicit alternative tool is named, but the exclusion is unambiguous and actionable.

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