terminal_only_sessions

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, what it returns (format, limits), or any side effects. The mention of 'mccsync adopt can add them' is about another tool, not this one's behavior. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 one short sentence with no wasted words, which is concise. However, it is cryptic and front-loads a definition rather than an action, and it does not earn its place by clarifying the parameter or usage context.

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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description still fails to explain min_kb or provide any usage context. It does not tell the agent when to call it or what to expect, leaving the definition incomplete.

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 explain min_kb. It does not. The parameter min_kb (default 1) is completely undocumented in the description, leaving the agent to guess its meaning (likely minimum size in kilobytes, but unstated). No compensation for the schema 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 specifies the resource (transcripts/sessions created only by terminal claude, not tied to any account) and implies the tool returns them. It is distinguishable from siblings like find_sessions (which likely searches all sessions) and list_accounts (accounts, not sessions), though it lacks an explicit verb such as 'list' or 'get'.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'mccsync adopt' but that is not a sibling, and no conditions are provided for choosing this over find_sessions or sync_sessions. The agent is left to infer its use.

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