list_sessions

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavior, and it does include return structure (a dict with 'sessions' key and summary fields). However, it does not mention sort order, pagination stability, or any potential errors or edge cases. Given the tool is a simple read/list operation, this is adequate but not rich.

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 well-organized with a clear opening line, then an 'Args' section and a 'Returns' section. Each sentence adds value, and the structure makes it easy to scan. There is no fluff or repetition.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (a list operation with optional filters) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the key facets: what it does, when to use it, the parameters, and the return shape. It misses minor details like sorting behavior but overall is complete enough for effective use.

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%, and the description fully compensates by explaining every parameter (limit, offset, tags, user_email) with enough context: defaults are given, and the purpose of each filter is stated. This goes above and beyond what the raw schema provides.

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 a specific action ('List Devin sessions') with a resource and purpose ('find sessions by tags or email, or get an overview of recent sessions'). It also mentions usefulness for finding session IDs to inspect or resume, which implicitly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_session or resume_session, though not naming them explicitly.

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 provides clear usage context: 'Use this to find sessions by tags or email, or to get an overview of recent sessions. Useful for finding session IDs to inspect or resume.' This tells the agent when to use the tool, but it does not explicitly state exclusions or describe when to prefer a sibling tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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