sessions_get_raw

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It does usefully disclose that the result is parsed JSON 'when possible' and intentionally raw, but it does not explain fallback behavior, error cases, authentication needs, or what happens when parsing is not possible.

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 two sentences with no redundant wording. The core action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds relevant context about why the tool is intentionally raw.

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 single-parameter read tool, the description covers the basic call pattern, but lacks guidance on fallback behavior when parsing fails and does not clarify the output shape. Given no annotations or output schema, a bit more detail would make it fully complete.

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 adds some meaning by clarifying that s3_key identifies a session object, but it does not describe the expected key format, how to obtain it, or any constraints.

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 a specific action ('Fetch a session object by S3 key') and a resource. The 'raw' qualifier and the explanation that the format is owned by 'strands-agents' help set it apart from potential processed/session variants, though no sibling is explicitly named.

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 this tool is for callers who want the unprocessed session object, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternative tools or when not to use it. No alternatives are named, so usage guidance is left largely to inference.

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