session_bootstrap

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It hints that output is 'compact markdown' (useful for token-cost expectations) but never states that the call is read-only, has no side effects, requires no arguments, or is safe to call repeatedly — all things an agent needs to know before invoking an unannotated tool.

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 short phrase with the intent ('quick orientation') front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification rather than tightness.

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 described, and a zero-argument tool is trivially invocable. What remains missing is content scope — what sections 'Lab state' covers and why this is preferable to the overlapping siblings — leaving the agent to call it speculatively.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the schema is trivially complete. The baseline of 4 applies; the description neither adds nor omits parameter meaning.

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 says it returns a 'compact markdown overview of Lab state', which gives a resource and an output form, but 'Lab state' is never defined and the verb ('bootstrap'/'orient') is implied rather than stated. Siblings like lab_map, explore, and workspace_triage plausibly also give overviews, and the description does nothing to distinguish this from them.

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?

'Quick orientation' implies the tool is meant to be called at the start of a session, which is a usable implied usage cue. However, there is no explicit when/when-not guidance and no named alternative among lab_map, explore, or workspace_triage, so the agent must guess whether this or one of those is the right entry point.

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