get_session

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries this burden. It states it reads messages and defaults to the current project, but doesn't mention the maxMessages limit (in schema) or response format. This is adequate but not detailed.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff: first sentence defines purpose, second sentence provides usage guidance. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with 3 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is too sparse. It lacks information on return values, errors, or constraints beyond what the schema provides. It does not fully prepare the agent for invocation.

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%, so baseline 3. The description only repeats the default behavior for projectId from the schema, adding no new meaning for sessionId or maxMessages.

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 'Get the full conversation from a session,' specifying a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_session_summary (summary vs. full) and search_conversations (search vs. full retrieval). Examples of use cases add clarity.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when you need to read the actual messages from a past session' with concrete examples. While it doesn't list when not to use or name alternatives, the context is clear and actionable.

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