list_sessions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full disclosure burden. It indicates a read operation (List) but provides no details about output format, pagination, filtering behavior, or what distinguishes a 'session file' from a 'recording' (relevant given the sibling tool).

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?

Single sentence that efficiently conveys the core function. The phrase 'via the legacy tool name' is somewhat cryptic and could be clearer, but the description avoids unnecessary verbosity and places the action verb at the beginning.

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?

Adequate for a zero-parameter tool with an output schema (which handles return value documentation). However, it lacks explanation of the 'legacy' designation's practical implications—whether this tool is deprecated, returns different data than `list_recordings`, or requires specific compatibility considerations.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, which establishes a baseline score of 4 per the evaluation rules. With no parameters to describe, the description is not penalized for missing parameter details.

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?

Uses specific verb 'List' and resource 'historical session files'. The phrase 'via the legacy tool name' distinguishes it from sibling `list_recordings` by implying this is the older/deprecated interface, though the phrasing is slightly ambiguous about whether the tool itself is legacy or accesses legacy data.

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 'legacy tool name' mention implies this may not be the preferred modern approach compared to `list_recordings`, suggesting implied usage context. However, it fails to explicitly state when to use this versus the alternative or what 'legacy' means for the caller.

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