sessions_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It clearly communicates a read-oriented listing behavior and the filtering scope ('active/restorable'), which is meaningful beyond a bare tool name. It does not discuss side effects, but 'List' strongly implies non-mutating behavior.

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, tight sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource immediately and avoids restating the tool name.

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 zero-parameter list tool with an output schema, this description is complete. It names the main result dimension ('connection state'), and the presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return fields in prose.

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 has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to add about parameter usage. The 100% schema coverage and empty properties make this a non-issue; the baseline for no parameters is appropriately high.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('Answer42 sessions') and defines the scope as 'active/restorable' with 'connection state.' This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinguishes it from singular session tools like session_status.

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 when to use the tool: to enumerate active/restorable sessions with connection state. However, it does not explicitly contrast it with siblings such as session_status or provide when-not-to-use guidance, so usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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