Get session data

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine value by enumerating the returned data (latest follower/subscriber/tip/cheer plus session/week/month/total counters), which is important since no output schema exists. It does not describe failure modes or response formatting.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource and its contents stated immediately and no padding or redundant clauses.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by listing the payload contents, which is what an agent needs to decide if this is the right read. It omits any indication of counter scoping or relationship to the other sessions_* tools, which is the main remaining gap.

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?

Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents 'channel' including its default resolution to SE_CHANNEL_ID. The description adds no further parameter semantics, which is the expected baseline when the schema does 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?

Specific verb ('Get') plus resource ('the channel's session data') with an enumeration of the contained entities (latest follower/subscriber/tip/cheer and session/week/month/total counters). This makes the tool's scope clear, though it never names or contrasts itself with adjacent siblings like sessions_top, sessions_get_settings, or sessions_reset.

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 states what is returned but offers no when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. An agent must infer from the sibling list alone whether this is the read path versus sessions_top (rankings) or sessions_get_settings (configuration).

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