native_session_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, and the description adds meaningful context beyond those flags: it explicitly states no session advancement and no model invocation, and clarifies that only safe summaries of enabled DeepSeek subagents and the managed-worktree location are returned. This substantially helps an agent predict side effects.

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 with no filler. The most decision-relevant facts—reading state, not advancing, not invoking a model—are front-loaded, and the second sentence adds precise return-value context without unnecessary length.

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 output schema, 100% parameter coverage, and annotations that already define safety characteristics, the description supplies the remaining context an agent needs: the tool is side-effect-free, returns safe summaries when present, and preserves ChatGPT as the sole main model. Nothing essential is missing 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%, so the input schema already documents all parameter meanings. The description does not add significant parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so the 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 uses a specific verb ('Read') with a clear resource ('native-session state') and adds a key distinguisher: the operation does not advance the session or invoke a model. It also names exactly what information is returned, making the tool's purpose unmistakable relative to its siblings.

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 phrase 'without advancing it or invoking a model' clearly establishes this as a non-mutating status-check tool, implying use when state is needed without side effects. It does not explicitly name alternatives like native_session_continue, so there is some room for inference, but the intended context is clear.

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