Clear goal

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool ends the session, distinguishes between completed and abandoned states, and mentions 'self-check fallback' as context. Adequate for a simple termination action.

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, zero wasted words. Information is front-loaded with the primary action then parameter usage. Perfectly concise.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., success indication, error cases). For a simple 'end session' tool, this is a minor gap; some agents may need to know if the action succeeded. Otherwise, the description covers the essentials for invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the 'self-check fallback' context for completed=true and explicitly stating that omitting or passing false means abandoned. This enhances understanding.

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?

Clearly states 'End a goal session' as verb+resource. Distinct from sibling tools (check_goal, get_status, set_goal) which are about checking, retrieving, or starting goals. The description also specifies the two usage modes via the completed parameter.

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?

Provides clear guidance on when to use completed=true (when goal verifiably met) vs other cases (abandoned). Does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the distinction between ending vs checking/getting is implicit.

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