listSessions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'List active sessions' implies a read-only operation but doesn't specify what constitutes an 'active' session, whether there are permissions required, how results are formatted, or if there are rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 perfectly concise at just three words ('List active sessions') with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it immediately understandable without unnecessary elaboration.

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, parameterless listing tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, without annotations and with the behavioral gaps noted above, it doesn't provide complete context about what 'active' means, how results are returned, or any operational constraints that might affect usage.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the absence of inputs. The description appropriately doesn't add parameter information beyond what's already covered by the schema, maintaining a clean baseline for parameterless tools.

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 'List active sessions' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('active sessions'), making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'gemini', 'help', or 'ping', which appear to be unrelated functions rather than alternative session listing tools.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the sibling tools seem unrelated (e.g., 'gemini', 'help', 'ping'), there's no explicit mention of when this tool is appropriate or any prerequisites for its use.

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