session_details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered externally. The description adds nothing beyond that — not what a lookup returns, whether sessions can be missing, or what basis/intent affect.

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?

It is short, but brevity here reflects under-specification rather than efficiency: a two-word phrase that duplicates the title carries no information and is not front-loaded with anything actionable.

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 tool with nested free-form parameters, an undocumented idempotency key, and no output schema, a two-word description leaves the agent unable to construct a correct call. Nothing compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 0%, and two parameters are opaque nested objects (basis, intent) with no documented shape. The description provides zero explanation of session_id, state_id, basis, intent, or idempotency_key, leaving required inputs completely unexplained.

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?

"session details" only restates the tool name in slightly different words; it never says what a session is, what details are returned, or which verb (fetch/render) applies. It gives no basis for distinguishing this from siblings like context, state, review_context, or history.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives among the many sibling read tools (context, state, review_context, events). An agent has nothing to route on.

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