Run Verified Continuity Turn

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

With no annotations, the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It reveals that the tool records an observation and returns context, indicating a write-plus-read operation, but omits side effects, session-safety semantics, verification meaning, error behavior, or state impact. This is insufficient for a stateful session tool.

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, well-formed sentence with no fluff. It front-loads the core action and is easy to scan, though it sacrifices informativeness for brevity.

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's complexity (11 params, 7 required, nested objects, no output schema), the description is far too thin. It does not explain parameter roles, return value structure, session lifecycle expectations, or any operational steps, making it inadequate for reliable 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 description coverage is only 9%; the description must compensate but fails to explain most parameters. It explicitly references only 'observation' and 'same session' (implying handle), while key required params like operation_id, authority, evidence_kind, and evidence remain semantically opaque.

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 action: record the current observation and return SDK-rendered Agent context for the same session. The verb+resource structure is clear and the two-step behavior helps distinguish it from session_begin or session_finish, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like session_action or session_verify. No prerequisites, context, or exclusion criteria are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and schema.

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