get_session_state

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions retrieving 'detailed state' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether this requires active session permissions, if it's read-only (implied by 'Get'), what happens if the session_id is invalid, or if there are rate limits. For a debug tool with potential side effects, this is insufficient transparency.

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 front-loads the core purpose ('Get detailed state of a specific debug session') and adds clarifying details ('including current position and status'). There's no wasted verbiage, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick understanding.

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 the complexity of debug sessions and the lack of annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'detailed state' entails, how it differs from other get_* tools, or what the return format looks like. For a tool in a rich debug environment with many siblings, more context is needed to guide 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 100%, with the parameter 'session_id' documented as optional and defaulting to the active session. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by implying the tool fetches 'detailed state', but doesn't elaborate on parameter semantics like format or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed state of a specific debug session'), specifying the scope includes 'current position and status'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_sessions' (which lists sessions) or 'get_stack_trace' (which focuses on stack), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from all similar tools like 'get_contexts' or 'get_variables', keeping it at 4 rather than 5.

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. With many sibling tools like 'get_contexts', 'get_stack_trace', and 'get_variables' that retrieve specific debug session data, there's no indication of when 'get_session_state' is preferred or what unique information it provides compared to others. This lack of context leaves usage unclear.

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