Session status (세션 상태)

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: it performs one live admin API call rather than reading local state only, which is a side effect an agent should know about; it does not mention failure modes or rate limits, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the local state report before the live check. Slightly fragmentary ('Also makes one admin API call...') and the first sentence packs three facts, but nothing is wasted.

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?

One required parameter at full schema coverage plus an output schema means return shape need not be explained. The description covers both the cached metadata and the live validity check, which is what an agent needs to decide whether to proceed; a note on what a missing session means would complete it.

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% for the single blog_url parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds nothing about the parameter (e.g. that the session lookup is keyed to blog_url), leaving the schema to do all the work.

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 ('Report') against a specific resource (saved session: existence, save time, expiry) and adds a second, distinct check ('live right now (valid/expired)'). It is cleanly separable from the sibling set, none of which query session state, though it never names tistory_session_init as the counterpart it is not.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the precondition check before publish/update operations, but the description never states when to call it, when not to, or that session_init is the alternative when no session exists. No explicit routing to siblings.

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