finalize_direct_session

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

Annotations provide no safety hints (all false), so the description carries the burden. It discloses side effects (capture snapshot, generate artifacts, mark finalized) and the ordering constraint, but lacks details on reversibility, failure modes, or required permissions. This is adequate but not rich.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the action, and every word earns its place. No redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the process steps and the critical ordering relationship. It lacks explicit prerequisites (e.g., snapshot existing) and alternative safe variant, but overall it is sufficiently complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 only parameter session_id, and the description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning. Baseline 3 applies as the schema already fully documents the parameter.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Finalize' with resource 'Direct session', enumerates concrete actions (capture after snapshot, generate diff/summary/change artifacts, mark finalized), and distinguishes itself from sibling audit_session via the explicit ordering constraint 'Must be called before audit_session'. This fully clarifies what the tool does and how it differs.

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?

Explicitly states 'Must be called before audit_session', providing a clear usage sequence and context. However, it does not mention when not to use it or alternative tools like safe_finalize_direct_session, so it stops short of full usage guidance.

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