bootstrap_session

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It indicates the tool is a one-shot session initializer and lists the data returned, but it does not state whether this is read-only or has side effects, nor does it describe any caveats like caching or resource intensity.

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?

The description is a single sentence, front-loaded with the key concept 'Single-call session bootstrap' and immediately enumerates the included elements. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema and full parameter descriptions, the description adequately covers return values and parameters. However, it lacks explicit usage context and behavioral transparency, making it slightly incomplete for an agent deciding whether to invoke this tool.

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 covers all three parameters with detailed descriptions, and the schema description coverage is 100%. The description itself does not add parameter-specific details but does mention the aggregates (route metadata, health, program hints) that correspond to the tool's output, which indirectly relates to parameters like include_health.

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 uses a specific verb ('bootstrap') and names the resource ('session'), and enumerates the included components (route metadata, read_plan, health, program hints), making it clear what the tool does. However, it could more explicitly state the outcome of bootstrapping or how it differs from calling these components separately.

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 implies this is a consolidated single-call alternative to several sibling tools, but it provides no explicit 'when to use' or 'use instead of' guidance. There is no mention of scenarios where this tool is preferred over route_task, read_plan, or repository_health individually.

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