sessions_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the default tail behavior and the reason (stale pre-reset data at the head), which is useful operational context. It does not mention file size limits, error behavior for missing files, or whether the full log can be retrieved by overriding tail_lines.

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 concise sentences with zero waste. The essential purpose and default behavior are front-loaded, and the routing hint to analyze_log and sessions_list is compact.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The description covers the core operation, default tail behavior, filename source, and downstream usage. It is nearly complete, lacking only edge-case guidance (e.g., missing file, overriding tail_lines to get full content).

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 explains that fname comes from sessions_list, adding meaning beyond the bare string type. It also mentions the default of 200 tail lines, which clarifies the tail_lines parameter's default behavior, though it does not explain how to retrieve the full log or what tail_lines accepts beyond the integer type.

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 states a specific verb and resource: reading the content of a specified session log file. It explicitly ties the filename source to sessions_list and names a downstream consumer (analyze_log), making the tool's identity unambiguous among its many siblings.

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?

It clearly indicates when to use it (after obtaining a filename from sessions_list) and hints at the default behavior of tailing 200 lines because the log head often contains stale data before a reset. However, it does not state any exclusions or conditions where an alternative tool might be preferable.

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