sessions

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

With no annotations, the description usefully establishes a read-style enumeration, oldest-first ordering, metadata-only results, and potentially large result sets. It does not explicitly discuss permissions or failures, but those omissions are modest for this listing operation and pagination behavior is covered in the schema.

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 front-loaded with the operation and ordering, then moves efficiently through result scope and usage. Its middle sentence is dense, but the clauses provide meaningful field and prompt semantics rather than filler.

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?

Together with the fully documented schema, the description supplies what an agent needs to invoke the tool: resource, scope, ordering, returned metadata, filtering rationale, and scale considerations. The absence of an output schema is substantially offset by the explicit enumeration of returned fields, while the input schema covers memory selection and pagination.

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%, including formats, defaults, filtering, and pagination, so the schema already does the heavy lifting. The description adds the purpose of repo and date filtering—obtaining ids for other verbs—but little additional parameter-level detail.

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 gives a specific verb and resource—enumerating a memory's sessions—and clarifies ordering, metadata-only scope, and the exact fields listed. Explaining that the opening prompt is what a session started from, rather than what it became, further prevents misinterpreting the result.

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?

It gives a concrete workflow: filter by repo or date to obtain session ids consumed by other verbs, and warns that an unfiltered memory may contain thousands of rows. "Metadata only" also signals when not to use it for session contents, though it does not name the specific sibling tool to use next.

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