OLX sessiya holati

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety traits are covered. The description adds value by disclosing the specific state it inspects (saved/valid session, account identity, SMS verification) and the rationale tied to posting adverts. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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 sentences, no filler. The core checking behavior is front-loaded, and the parenthetical about OLX's phone requirement adds essential context without bloating the description.

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?

For a zero-parameter status-checking tool, the description is nearly complete: it states what is checked, why it matters, and which sibling domain does not need it. It does not describe the exact response shape, but with no output schema and openWorldHint=true, the missing return details are a minor gap rather than a blocker.

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 is empty with zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. With no parameters to document, the baseline of 4 applies, and the description does not need to add parameter-specific semantics.

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 uses a specific verb ('Check') with a clear resource ('OLX account session') and lists the exact facts returned: session saved/valid, account identity, and SMS-verification status. This is distinct from sibling tools like olx_login or olx_get_my_profile, so an agent can identify it without opening schemas.

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 context for when this tool matters: OLX requires a verified phone before posting adverts, so checking session and phone-verification status is a prerequisite step. It also gives a when-not signal by noting that competitor/market tools do not need a session, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or spell out a full decision rule.

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