Get Session Links for Doc

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals prerequisites, tier gating, and the exact return dict structure including fields like tier_gate and is_stale. It does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation, but the 'Return' language and lack of side-effect language imply safety, and the return schema is well documented.

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 well-organized with a clear intro, an Args section, and a Returns section. Every line adds relevant information with no fluff, making it efficient and easy to scan.

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?

Given the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It covers prerequisites, tier behavior, and the full return payload including schema_version for version negotiation. No critical operational detail appears to be missing.

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 input schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), but the description compensates by explaining doc_id as the LoreDocs document ID and limit as max results with a default of 5. This adds meaningful semantics beyond the bare schema, though it does not elaborate further on edge cases or formatting.

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 opens with a precise verb and resource: 'Return cross-product LoreConvo sessions linked to a LoreDocs document.' This clearly identifies the tool's function and distinguishes it from siblings like vault_get_linked_sessions by specifying the cross-product nature and the LoreDocs document linkage.

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 clear usage context by stating that both LoreConvo and LoreDocs must be installed, and that Pro tier is required for auto-links while manual links are always returned. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or when not to use it, but the prerequisites and conditions give solid practical guidance.

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