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 burden. It delivers one genuinely valuable caveat — that a graph whose blocks all finished still reports "running" — which prevents a real misinterpretation, but it omits whether this is a side-effect-free read, what errors occur for an unknown session_id, or anything about auth.

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?

Two short sentences, default behavior front-loaded, zero filler. 'incl. stream endpoints' is slightly compressed and reads as a dangling fragment, which keeps it just short of ideal.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is not needed, and the default-plus-status-quirk note covers the main behavioral risk. What's still missing for a status tool among many session-related siblings is any disambiguation from list_sessions and control_session.

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 coverage is 0% for the single session_id parameter, whose schema entry is a bare nullable string with default null. The description partially compensates by explaining what the default resolves to (the session deployed from the current graph), but it gives no format or acceptance details for an explicit id.

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?

States the resource (session) and what it returns (state, including stream endpoints), with a scope note about the default session. It is clear on its own, but it never names or contrasts with the obvious alternatives in the sibling list (list_sessions, control_session, backend_status), so an agent must infer the boundary itself.

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 parenthetical 'default: the one deployed from the current graph' tells you what happens when you omit session_id, which is a genuine usage cue. However, there is no explicit statement of when to pick this over list_sessions (enumerate sessions) or control_session (act on a session), so usage is only implied.

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