ragflow_list_chat_sessions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the useful behavioral detail that messages are not included and supports pagination via schema. It says nothing about ordering defaults or filtering interaction, which 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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the parenthetical about messages is a useful scoping constraint. It is appropriately sized for a list tool, though it could compress less usefully and still say more about filtering.

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?

An output schema exists, which carries return-shape information, and annotations define the safety profile. For a filtered list tool the remaining essentials are that it scopes to a chat assistant and excludes messages, both stated. The 71% schema coverage handles pagination and ordering.

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 71%, so the schema already documents most parameters (name, page, page_size, chat_id, session_id). The description adds no parameter-specific meaning for the undocumented ones (desc, orderby), so this sits at the baseline rather than excelling.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the sessions of a chat assistant') with a scope clarification that messages are excluded. It is distinguishable from siblings like ragflow_get_chat_session or ragflow_list_chats, though it does not explicitly name the alternative listing tool, so it stops short of 5.

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?

No indication of when to use this versus ragflow_list_chats, ragflow_get_chat_session, or ragflow_list_agent_sessions. There is no when-not guidance and no prerequisites; the agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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