Blackboard session status

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It adds useful behavioral context: the tool reports session validity, capture time, and cookies, and the keepAlive parameter can extend the session. It doesn't mention what happens if no session exists, but the annotations cover the read-only nature and the description adds the keep-alive behavior.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states what it reports, the second gives the usage trigger. The most important information is front-loaded.

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 read-only diagnostic tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers what the tool does, when to use it, and the parameter's effect. A minor gap is not describing the output format or what happens when no session exists, but the annotations and simplicity of the tool make this acceptable.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the keepAlive parameter. The description adds context by explaining that keepAlive pings the keep-alive endpoint to extend the session, which goes beyond the schema's bare description. This is a good complement to the schema.

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 tool's function: reporting session validity duration, capture time, and held cookies. It uses a specific verb ('reports') and resource ('stored Blackboard session'), and the title 'Blackboard session status' aligns with the description. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on session diagnostics rather than course/content operations.

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 explicitly says when to call this tool: 'when other tools start failing with session errors.' This provides a clear trigger condition and implies it is a diagnostic tool rather than a primary operation. It doesn't need to name alternatives because the sibling list shows no other session-status tool, and the guidance is sufficient for an agent to select it.

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