d365fo_list_sync_sessions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states it lists sessions, implying read-only, but does not mention if it requires authentication, rate limits, or any side effects. For a non-annotated tool, this is insufficient.

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 concise with two sentences plus parameter and return notes. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the main action is front-loaded.

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 tool's simplicity (one optional param, no output schema), the description covers the basics: what it does, input, and return type. However, it lacks details on the dictionary structure (keys like status, progress). It is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description explains the 'profile' parameter, including its optionality and default behavior. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's type and default value.

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 retrieves a list of currently active sync sessions with status and progress. It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like d365fo_get_sync_history (historical) and d365fo_get_sync_progress (single session).

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 implies usage when an overview of active sync sessions is needed, but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives among the many sync-related siblings.

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