Get Jules Session Output

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the return includes 'final output and results' and 'pull request details,' and implies a prerequisite that the session be completed. However, it does not disclose error behavior if used prematurely, auth requirements, or guarantee of non-mutation. Adequate 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains no redundant or filler text. It earns its place with the specific mention of 'pull request details' and the completion prerequisite.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers the purpose and usage condition. It could be more complete by explaining what happens if the session is not completed, but given the low complexity, it is nearly complete, earning a 4.

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%, and the parameter 'sessionId' is already described as 'Session ID to get output for.' The description does not add additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Retrieve the final output and results'), the resource ('from a completed Jules session'), and even includes specific content ('including pull request details'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying the post-completion context, differentiating it from get_status and list_sessions.

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 'Use after session state is COMPLETED,' providing clear timing guidance. It does not mention when not to use it or alternative tools, but the completion prerequisite is a strong usage guideline, earning a 4.

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