kde_session_create

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true; the description adds the meaningful isolation guarantee that no live desktop is touched. It says nothing about lifecycle, resource cost, cleanup, or any permission/setup requirements, so behavioral context remains thin.

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?

A single tight sentence with the core action front-loaded and the safety constraint attached; nothing is wasted. It is efficient but so terse that it omits parameter and return details an agent needs.

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 creation tool with four undocumented parameters and no output schema, the description omits critical information: what the call returns (a session identifier/handle), how to reference the created session afterwards, and what make_default changes. Adequate framing but not complete enough to invoke confidently.

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% across four parameters, so the description carries the full burden and adds nothing — no meaning for name, width/height bounds, or the ambiguous make_default flag. The agent can only guess what 'make_default' defaults for.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (creates an isolated private KWin session) plus a scope negation that separates it from anything touching the live desktop. It doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings like kde_session_launch or kde_session_use, so differentiation is only partial.

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 clause 'never creates or attaches to the live desktop' functions as an implicit when-not condition, which is genuinely useful. However there is no positive guidance on when to choose this over kde_session_launch or kde_session_use, so the agent must infer the workflow.

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