start_session

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that it loads state and generates a brief, but it does not explicitly state whether it has side effects, requires auth, or modifies anything. The behavior is partially transparent but not fully disclosed.

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 immediately states the tool's purpose and then elaborates. No wasted words.

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?

The output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values. The main behavior is described. However, the omission of parameter semantics and explicit side-effect disclosure leaves some gaps, but overall it covers the core context well for a session-start tool.

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 description does not mention the 'path' parameter at all. With 0% schema description coverage, the agent cannot know what 'path' refers to or how to use it. The description must compensate for the schema's lack of explanatory detail, and it fails to do so.

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 the specific verb 'Start' with resource 'development session' and then details what it loads and generates (state, PRD, active tasks, handoff, Session Brief). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools such as end_session and generate_handoff.

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 phrase 'Start a development session' provides clear context for when to use it (at the beginning of a session). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or say when not to use it, lacking exclusionary guidance.

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