session_list

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

Without any annotations, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It discloses that it supports pagination via a next_page token and returns id + status for each session. It does not mention idempotency or side effects, but as a listing operation, these are minimal. The description provides sufficient behavioral context beyond a simple 'list sessions'.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that cover the purpose, filters, and pagination detail. It is front-loaded with the main action and uses no wasted words. Every sentence adds value.

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 has 4 parameters, no annotations, and an existing output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, filters, and pagination. It is missing details like error handling or what happens with empty results, but the output schema likely covers return structure. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for a simple listing tool.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the statuses parameter with an example, and the page parameter through pagination context. However, the limit parameter is not described, and the agent_id is only briefly mentioned as optional. The description adds value for most parameters but is incomplete for limit, which lowers the score from a 4 to a 3.

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 'List sessions' with the specific verb 'list' and resource 'sessions', and it explains optional filters by agent_id and statuses. It distinguishes from sibling tools like session_get which retrieves a single session, and other session actions. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 clear context for when to use this tool: to list sessions with optional filtering and pagination. It implicitly excludes actions like getting a single session (session_get) or mutating sessions (session_delete). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives, which would elevate it to a 5.

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