get_session_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says 'Get detailed information' but doesn't specify what 'detailed information' includes, whether the call is read-only, whether it requires a running session, or what the output structure is. An output schema exists, which helps, but the description itself adds little behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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 short and front-loaded with the main purpose in the first sentence. The parameter documentation is minimal and earns its place. It could be slightly more structured, but there is no wasted text.

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 tool has an output schema, so return values are presumably covered there. The description is complete enough for a simple read-only info tool, but it lacks detail on what 'detailed information' means and when to prefer this over get_session_snapshot or get_track_info. Given the sibling set includes several similar getters, a bit more context would help.

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 does document the single parameter, user_prompt, explaining it is 'for telemetry.' This adds meaning beyond the schema, which only shows a default empty string. However, the description doesn't clarify whether the parameter is truly optional or how it affects the call, so it's adequate but not rich.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get detailed information about the current Ableton session.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_track_info or get_clip_notes, which target narrower resources. However, it doesn't explicitly name a sibling or contrast itself, so it falls just short of a 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 implies usage: call this when you need detailed information about the current Ableton session. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives like get_session_snapshot or get_track_info. The context is clear enough for an agent to infer, but there is no explicit routing guidance.

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