list_sessions

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 does declare 'Read-only' and 'for observability', which is the most important safety fact for a zero-parameter inspection tool. It says nothing about result volume, ordering, or whether output is bounded, leaving some behavioral gaps that annotations would normally cover.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed immediately by the safety note and the alternative routing. No redundant restatement of the tool name, though the 'Use to...' opener is slightly formulaic.

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 no-parameter read tool with an output schema that already documents return values, the description covers purpose, read-only nature, and the sibling boundary. The only uncovered area is whether the listing is bounded or ordered, a minor point given the output schema exists.

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 takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is no parameter meaning for the description to add. The schema is a bare empty object, consistent with the description's framing of an unfiltered 'current sessions' listing.

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 and resource ('list current Host JobManager sessions') plus what each entry contains ('their states'), and scopes it to current/active sessions. The 'current' qualifier is what separates it from previous_sessions and recovery_overview, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings without reading any schema.

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?

Gives an explicit when-not rule and names the two alternatives ('prior-process sessions instead use previous_sessions or recovery_overview'), which is stronger than most definitions. It does not address the possible overlap with status or list_processes, so the routing guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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