Listar sesiones OpenCode

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. The word 'Lista' implies a read-only operation, and 'sesiones recientes' adds context about scope. However, it does not clarify what 'recientes' means, whether sessions are active/archived, or any prerequisites beyond what the schema already states.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence: it names the action and resource first, then states the use cases. At roughly 15 words, every word earns its place with no redundant or filler content.

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?

For a simple list tool with no output schema, the description is adequate: it states the tool returns recent project sessions and gives use contexts. It does not detail the exact return shape, but the verb 'Lista' implies a list of sessions, and the schema covers the parameters, so it is reasonably complete for its low complexity.

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?

The input schema has 100% parameter description coverage for both 'limit' and 'directory', so the schema already documents parameter semantics. The description does not add any parameter-level detail beyond the schema, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 and resource: 'Lista sesiones recientes del proyecto' (lists recent project sessions). This clearly identifies the operation, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like opencode_status or opencode_agents, so it falls short of a 5.

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 'útil para retomar trabajo o auditar tareas en segundo plano' clearly states when to use the tool: to resume work or audit background tasks. It provides concrete use cases but does not mention when to avoid it or name alternatives, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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