Check session status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does explain the report contents (usable session, owner, freshness) but does not explicitly state that calling it is side-effect-free or describe what happens when no session exists. This is adequate for a simple status check 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?

Two concise sentences with no wasted words. The most important outcome—whether a usable session exists—is front-loaded, and the actionable guidance follows directly.

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?

The description gives enough context for an agent to know when to call the tool and what kind of information to expect, even without an output schema. It could be more explicit about the exact return format, but the semantics are sufficiently clear for deciding the next step in a login flow.

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 nothing to document. The baseline of 4 applies because there are no parameter semantics to convey and the description does not need to compensate for any missing parameter details.

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 verb and resource: it reports whether a usable Banco General session exists, its owner, and freshness. This strongly distinguishes it from the login and account-list 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 description gives explicit when-to-use guidance: call this before asking the user for credentials, because they may already be logged in. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or name an alternative, but the unique purpose makes that less necessary.

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