List Session Branches (v3)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. However, the description adds no extra behavioral context beyond what the name and annotations imply—no mention of branch ordering, whether nested branches are included, or the return format. It is purely a restatement of the tool's purpose.

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, front-loaded sentence that states exactly what the tool does with no redundant words or filler. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and scannable.

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 simple list operation with one parameter and strong annotations, the description is complete enough: it names the exact resource and version. However, the absence of an output schema and any description of the returned branch representation leaves a minor gap, preventing a perfect score.

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 input schema fully describes the single required parameter 'session_id' with the description 'Session id' (100% coverage). The tool description does not add any further meaning to the parameter beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for schema-heavy coverage but does not exceed it.

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 'List the branches created from a v3 session' uses a specific verb (list) and resource (branches from a v3 session), clearly distinguishing itself from general session tools like lyzr_session3_get or lyzr_session3_list_messages. The version qualifier 'v3' also differentiates it from non-v3 session tools.

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 implies its use case (to enumerate branches of a v3 session) but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over related tools such as lyzr_session3_tree or lyzr_session3_ancestry. There are no exclusions or alternative tool mentions, leaving the agent to infer contextual fit.

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