Get Docs for Session

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It reveals that manual links are sorted first, auto-links with stale embeddings are marked with is_stale=True and include an upgrade_message. It also specifies the return dict structure. This is comprehensive for a read tool, though it doesn't mention permissions beyond the tier requirement.

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 concise and well-structured. The first sentence immediately states the core purpose. Subsequent details are organized logically with clear sections for arguments and return value. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description thoroughly explains the return dictionary with schema_version, cross_product_available, tier_gate, links, and reason. It also covers edge cases like free-tier behavior and stale embeddings. The agent has all necessary information to use the tool correctly.

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 description adds significant meaning to both parameters: session_id is a LoreConvo session UUID, and limit is the max results with a default of 5. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description fully compensates by providing clear semantics that the schema alone lacks.

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 that the tool returns LoreDocs documents cross-linked to a LoreConvo session. This is a specific verb+resource combination, and it distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_session' by focusing on cross-linking. The purpose is immediately clear.

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 explicit usage context: Pro tier only, both LoreConvo and LoreDocs must be installed, and free-tier callers get an empty list. While it doesn't explicitly compare to sibling tools, the context is sufficient for an agent to know when this tool is applicable.

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