quantum_session_status

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the content of the response (status, uptime, evaluated possibilities, convergence state), which implies a non-mutating read, but it never states read-only behavior, side effects, polling/cost behavior, or what happens for an unknown or expired session_id.

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?

One efficiently front-loaded sentence with the verb first and the enumerated return categories after. It is dense with jargon but nothing is redundant or padded.

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 read tool with no output schema and no annotations, enumerating the returned fields (status, uptime, evaluated possibilities, convergence state) fills the biggest gap. It falls short only on error behavior for invalid sessions and on when the snapshot is refreshed.

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% and the single session_id parameter is documented in the schema itself. The description adds only light framing by tying session_id to a 'Quantum Agent session', which is the baseline expectation when the schema already 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?

States a specific verb ('Queries') and a specific resource ('persistent status, continuous uptime, evaluated possibilities, and convergence state for a Quantum Agent session'), which is far more concrete than a bare 'get status'. It implicitly separates itself from the other quantum_* siblings by scoping to a session, though it never names them explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus quantum_system_info or quantum_solve, and no mention of prerequisites such as needing an existing session from quantum_init_task. The agent must infer that this is a post-init polling tool from the word 'session' alone.

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