create_sdac_session

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose side effects. It mentions cost savings but does not explain session lifecycle, whether it creates persistent state, or how the session connects to run_sdac_trial/end_sdac_session. For a mutation-like create tool, this is a significant gap.

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 two concise sentences. The first states the core action; the second provides valuable rationale. No filler or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple, but the description omits workflow context: it doesn't mention that a session will be used with subsequent SDAC tools or what the return value indicates. With no output schema, this missing guidance prevents it from being fully complete.

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 schema covers the single auth_token parameter with a description, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning, but the schema already provides adequate coverage.

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 clearly states the tool's action ('Start a simulation session') and its purpose ('Test EE combinations at a fraction of the cost before creating real decisions'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_sdac_session (retrieve) and create_decision (real action).

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 gives clear context for when to use it—before creating real decisions, as a cost-saving simulation. It implies an alternative (create_decision) but doesn't explicitly name or exclude other tools, so it's clear but not fully explicit.

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