Kagan - AI Orchestration Layer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'interactive session' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this is a read/write operation, permissions needed, session duration, or side effects. For a tool with no annotations, this is inadequate.

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, efficient sentence that's front-loaded with the core action. It's appropriately sized, but lacks detail that could enhance clarity without sacrificing conciseness.

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 complexity (starting an interactive session), no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and an output schema (which reduces need to explain returns), the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover key aspects like session behavior, parameter context, or differentiation from siblings, making it insufficient 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds no meaning beyond the schema—doesn't explain what 'task_id' represents, its format, or how it relates to starting a session. With 1 parameter and no schema descriptions, this is a significant gap.

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 'Start an interactive session for a task' states a verb ('Start') and resource ('interactive session'), but it's vague about what an 'interactive session' entails and doesn't distinguish from siblings like run_start, run_get, or task_create. It's not tautological (doesn't just restate 'run_create'), but lacks specificity.

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 on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like run_start or task_create is provided. The description implies it's for starting sessions, but doesn't specify prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent with minimal usage direction.

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