session_refresh

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool does not create a new session, and provides crucial output handling instructions: 'Output the display field verbatim as your response — tool results are collapsed in the CLI.' This is helpful transparency. No contradictions.

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 concise: two clear sentences plus a display instruction. Purpose and usage are front-loaded. Every sentence adds value—no redundancy, no filler. Highly efficient communication.

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 tool's simplicity (1 optional parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is largely complete: it covers purpose, usage, and output behavior. It could mention that an active session must exist, but this is implied. Overall, adequate for correct 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% (the single parameter 'project' has a complete description in the schema). The tool description does not add extra parameter context, but the schema already provides sufficient semantics. Baseline score 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 tool's purpose: 'Re-surface institutional context (threads, decisions) for the current active session without creating a new session.' It uses a specific verb ('Re-surface') and identifiable resource ('institutional context'), and explicitly distinguishes it from creating a new session, differentiating it from sibling tools like session_start.

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 provides explicit usage scenarios: 'Use mid-session when you need to remember where you left off, after context compaction, or after a long gap.' This gives clear context for when to use the tool. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternatives, but the guidance is sufficient for an agent to decide.

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