show_session

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state the operation is read-only, which is a critical safety property. However, it does not mention any side effects, performance implications, authentication requirements, or what the response contains. While read-only is the most important trait, the lack of additional context leaves the agent with minimal behavioral understanding.

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 extremely concise—a single phrase—and front-loads the core purpose ('Session usage statistics') with the read-only qualifier immediately following. Every word earns its place, and there is no fluff or redundancy.

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?

While the tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description is too terse to be complete. It does not clarify what 'session' refers to, what specific statistics are provided, or how the output is structured. Given the large set of sibling 'show_*' tools, an agent cannot reliably determine if this is the right tool without more detail. The read-only qualifier helps but does not compensate for the missing scope definition.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema fully covers them (100% coverage). The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable because there are none to document. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and nothing detracts from that.

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 states a clear verb-resource pair: 'Session usage statistics' implies showing session statistics, and it explicitly marks the operation as read-only. It is not a tautology and distinguishes itself from many sibling 'show_*' tools by focusing on session usage, though it does not specify what kind of session (e.g., network, user, VPN) or what statistics are included.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like show_statistic, show_flow, or show_traffic. There is no mention of conditions that favor this tool, nor exclusions. The read-only nature is implied but not tied to specific usage scenarios.

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