llmconveyors-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and discloses: safety profile ('Read-only, no side effects'), auth requirements ('Requires scope: sessions:read'), and return characteristics (generation history vs full artifacts). Minor gap on rate limits or error conditions.

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?

Five sentences, each earning its place: purpose/return value, usage guidance, safety declaration, auth requirement, and alternative tool reference. Well front-loaded with core purpose and zero 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?

Given the simple single-parameter input and lack of output schema, the description adequately covers expected behavior, return structure (session object with generation history), auth needs, and sibling alternatives. Minor gap on error handling (e.g., session not found).

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 has 100% coverage with 'id' described as 'Session ID'. The description references the parameter ('by ID') but does not add substantial syntax, format, or semantic details beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score appropriate for complete schema 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 specific action (Get), resource (session), and scope (by ID, returning generation history). It explicitly distinguishes from sibling 'session-hydrate' by contrasting 'without loading full artifacts' vs 'full session data including all artifacts and logs'.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use ('check what generations exist...without loading full artifacts') and names the specific alternative for different use cases ('use session-hydrate instead'). This gives clear guidance on tool selection vs siblings.

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