Get transcript

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description usefully adds that the payload contains both messages and tool calls, but says nothing about truncation via max_steps or whether the session must be completed.

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?

It is short, but the terseness comes at the cost of substance: a single verbless fragment carries no structure, no return-format note, and no constraint information. This reads as under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness.

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?

With no output schema and 33% param coverage, the description is the only place return shape and parameter behavior could be conveyed, yet it gives one fragment. An agent cannot tell what a transcript entry looks like or how max_steps affects the result.

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 33%: only 'agent' is documented in the schema, while session_id and max_steps are bare. The description adds no parameter meaning at all — notably it never explains that max_steps caps the number of steps returned — so it fails to compensate for the gap.

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 fragment 'Turns (messages, tool calls) of one past session' identifies the resource (a session's message/tool-call transcript) but uses no verb like retrieve/get and omits 'transcript' itself, leaving the action implied. It partially distinguishes from list_sessions/search_sessions by scoping to 'one past session', but an agent must infer the operation from the name alone.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite (e.g. obtain session_id from list_sessions), and no alternative named such as search_sessions. Usage is only implied by the phrase 'one past session'.

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