mind_session_last

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It clearly discloses deprecation and removal in v2.0, which is the most critical trait for tool selection. It does not state whether the operation is read-only or what happens if called, but for a deprecated stub the key behavioral disclosure is present.

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 extremely concise, front-loading the most important information (DEPRECATED) and including only the essential replacement instruction and a brief purpose note. No sentence is wasted.

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 simple, deprecated tool with a fully documented single parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what it does, that it should not be used, and what to use instead. It does not explain the contents of a 'session summary', but that is not necessary for the agent's decision.

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 100%, and the single parameter ('agent') is already documented in the schema as 'Only consider this agent's sessions'. The description adds no further parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 the resource and action ('Get last session summary') and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling it replaces by naming mind_session(action="last"). The purpose is clear, though it is presented as a parenthetical after the deprecation notice, so it is not front-loaded.

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 explicitly tells the agent not to use this tool, gives the exact alternative (mind_session(action="last")), and states the removal version (v2.0). This is complete when/when-not guidance with a named alternative.

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