get_sdac_session

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the operation is free and lists returned fields, but it doesn't explicitly state it's read-only or discuss any side effects or permissions beyond the auth_token parameter.

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 compact sentences, front-loads the purpose, and includes the helpful 'Free' detail without wasted words.

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 simple lookup tool, the description adequately covers what, when, and cost. It doesn't detail the response structure, but no output schema exists and the listed return fields suffice.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both params, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal parameter insight beyond identifying session_id as the lookup key.

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 identifies the action (look up), the resource (simulation session by ID), and specifies the returned data (status, trial count, accumulated cost), which distinguishes it from other session/trial 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?

The description provides a clear use case ('Use this to see what end_sdac_session will settle') and notes it is free, but it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives like get_trial_status or run_sdac_trial.

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