List build sessions

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds value beyond those by defining the session scope ('owned by the authenticated account') and the returned fields ('session ids and current state'), which helps the agent anticipate what it will receive.

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 concise sentences deliver the core action, scope, returned information, and the important prerequisite relationship to other build tools. No filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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?

This is a parameterless read-only list operation with an output schema available, so the description only needs to state scope and purpose—which it does completely. The note that other build tools depend on these ids is useful additional context.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so there is no parameter burden for the description to carry. The mention of 'session ids' clarifies meaningful output concepts but no parameter detail is needed here.

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 names a specific verb ('List') and resource ('problem-draft build sessions owned by the authenticated account'), and specifies the returned content ('session ids and current state'). It clearly distinguishes this list operation from the many create/update/delete build-session siblings.

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 phrase 'Every other build tool needs one of these ids' gives clear contextual guidance to call this before other build tools. It does not explicitly name a specific alternative or state when not to use it, but the prerequisite framing is strong.

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