Tag Session

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions hierarchical persona matching but does not disclose whether tagging is additive or overwrites, the impact on existing tags, or any required permissions. The behavioral traits are minimally described.

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, with a clear purpose statement followed by bulleted parameter explanations. No redundant or unnecessary sentences.

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 description covers purpose and parameters, and mentions hierarchical personas. However, it lacks information about return values, error handling, idempotency, or behavior when tagging an already-tagged session. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, these gaps reduce completeness.

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 includes an Args section that adds meaning beyond the schema: explains session_id as 'Session to tag', persona_name with examples, and relevance_note as optional. This significantly compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions (0% coverage in context signals).

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 the tool's action: 'Tag a session with a persona for filtered recall.' It uses a specific verb (tag) and resource (session with persona), distinguishing it from siblings like pin_session or tag_as_anti_pattern.

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 for 'filtered recall' but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pin_session or tag_as_anti_pattern. No when-not-to-use conditions or exclusions are provided.

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