get_session_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only operation with examples of possible states, but it does not describe the exact return format, error behavior (e.g., session not found), or whether any side effects occur. It adds some value with the state examples but lacks deeper transparency.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the purpose and provides useful examples without any fluff or redundancy.

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?

With only one parameter and no output schema, the description should compensate by explaining the return format more explicitly. While it gives examples of states, it does not list all possible values or error cases, making it only partially 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?

The schema provides full coverage for the single parameter sessionId, including a clear description. The tool description adds no additional parameter-specific information, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 function: checking the current state of a specific WhatsApp session. The verb 'Check' and resource 'current state' are specific, and the examples (connected, qr_ready) distinguish it from sibling tools that list, start, or manage sessions.

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 implied usage is to check the status of a single session, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this versus list_sessions, get_session_qr, or other alternatives. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, so the guidance is only implied.

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