qualto_session_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. 'Read' implies a non-mutating operation, but the description does not explicitly state side effects, permissions, or that nothing is changed, and the phrase 'write policy' adds ambiguity about whether a write operation is involved.

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 a single sentence that immediately states the action and subject. It contains no filler, and for a parameterless tool this is an appropriately minimal and well-structured definition.

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 zero parameters and an output schema, the description need not document inputs or return shapes. It is slightly ambiguous whether 'write policy' is a noun phrase being read or an instruction to write, but overall the tool is simple enough that the description provides adequate context.

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 tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so there is no parameter detail the description needs to add. The no-parameter baseline of 4 applies because the description cannot meaningfully clarify parameters that do not exist.

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 states a specific verb ('Read') and a concrete resource ('current Qualto session state and write policy'), so it is not a tautology. It does not explicitly differentiate from qualto_read_context, but the resource scope is distinct enough for an agent to identify the tool's purpose.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool vs alternatives such as qualto_read_context or qualto_attest_claim. No conditions, exclusions, or when-not-to-use instructions are provided, leaving the agent to infer routing from the name and context signals.

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