cc_session_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool 'only reads recent output' and lists statuses, implying read-only behavior. However, it omits details about required session existence, behavior with invalid session_id, or absence of 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 a single sentence that front-loads the purpose. It is relatively concise but could be slightly more efficient by removing the colon and enumeration, though it remains clear.

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 lack of output schema and parameter descriptions, the description does not cover the return format, interpretation of 'recent output', or the effect of 'max_chars'. The session_id's 'default' is unexplained, making the tool incomplete for effective use.

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 two parameters with no descriptions, and the tool description does not explain 'max_chars' or 'session_id' at all. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description fails to add any meaning beyond the basic type and default values.

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 clearly states the tool checks the current status of the managed CLI and lists possible statuses (waiting, error, completed, running, idle). It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like cc_list_sessions or cc_start_session. However, it could be more explicit about the session context.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cc_list_sessions or cc_start_session. It does not mention prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from context.

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