parlament_get_sessions

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and nondestructive. The description adds important behavioral context: session names can be null for recent sessions. This goes beyond 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?

The description is concise, using a single sentence plus structured XML tags for use case and notes. However, it could be slightly more efficient by integrating the notes into the main text.

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 output schema exists, the description explains the tool's purpose and a key behavioral note (null names). However, it omits parameter descriptions, which are essential for proper invocation. This is a moderate gap.

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%, yet the description does not explain the parameters (limit, offset). It only describes the output, leaving the agent to infer input semantics from the schema alone. This is a significant gap.

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 verb 'auflisten' (list) and the resource 'parlamentarische Sessionen' (parliamentary sessions). The use case explicitly mentions using session IDs for filtering votes or transcripts, distinguishing this tool from siblings like get_votes or get_transcripts.

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 a clear use case for when to use the tool (fetching session IDs for filtering). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, though for a simple listing tool this is sufficient.

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