sessions_listRetrieve sessions owned by the server's Tinker account, with optional limit and offset controls for pagination.
List sessions owned by the server's Tinker account.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| offset | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
readOnlyHint=true already establishes a safe read operation. The description adds the server-account ownership scope, which is useful context beyond annotations, but it does not disclose pagination behavior or response shape details.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, it is perhaps too terse given the undocumented parameters, though conciseness itself is strong.
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?
The output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and readOnlyHint covers safety. But with 0% parameter description coverage and no usage guidance, an agent lacks context for filtering and pagination beyond the bare parameter names.
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 by explaining limit and offset. It provides no parameter meaning at all, leaving the two pagination parameters semantically undocumented.
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 (List) and resource (sessions) with an ownership scope constraint. It clearly contrasts with session_get by being a list operation, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives.
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 use this tool versus session_get, session_trace_export, or other sibling listing tools. The ownership constraint is contextual but not usage-routing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.