kin_session_heartbeat

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false, and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the lifecycle behavior 'Keep a session alive' and the write association, but does not explain auth requirements, side effects, or failure 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 short sentences with no wasted words, and the core action is front-loaded. The phrase 'Session plumbing for writes' is slightly vague, but the overall definition is efficiently sized.

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 one-parameter heartbeat tool with annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It still lacks lifecycle context such as when a session needs heartbeating relative to other session tools, but nothing critical is missing for invocation.

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 session_id UUID parameter is already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 clear action, 'Keep a session alive,' and scopes it with 'Session plumbing for writes,' naming the session resource. It does not distinguish this from sibling session lifecycle tools such as kin_session_start, kin_session_end, or kin_session_exec.

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 only implied context ('for writes') and no explicit guidance on when to call heartbeat versus kin_session_start, kin_session_end, or kin_session_exec. No alternatives, prerequisites, or frequency guidance are named.

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