vibeside_import_session

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, yet it omits the key behavioral fact that importing clears existing recorded events by default (only visible in the schema's clearExisting default). It also says nothing about permissions, error behavior on malformed input, or the effect on current session state.

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 front-loaded sentence that identifies the action, the inputs, and the purpose with zero filler. Nothing is wasted or buried.

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?

There is no output schema or annotations, so the description must stand alone for a tool that mutates stored session state. It covers formats and intent but omits the destructive default (clearing existing events) and any failure behavior, leaving a meaningful 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 100%, so all three parameters are already documented. The description echoes the source formats ('file or inline string/base64') but adds no new syntax, precedence between content and filePath, or default-behavior detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb (Import) and resource (recorded telemetry session), plus the accepted sources and file formats. It also names the payoff ('offline time-travel debugging'), making it distinguishable from siblings like export_session or record_session, though it never explicitly names those alternatives.

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 phrase 'for offline time-travel debugging' implies the context in which to use it, and the format list helps match a source. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no routing against related tools such as export_session or restore_session_snapshot.

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