Sessions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so safety and repeatability are covered structurally. The description adds the useful workflow fact that this tool yields the session_key other tools consume, but says nothing about result volume, default limits, or what happens with no filters applied.

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 sentences, zero waste, with the capability statement first and the motivating reason for calling it second. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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-required-parameter discovery tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers what the agent needs to decide to call it and why. It could note that an unfiltered call returns many sessions and that narrowing by year/meeting_key is advisable, but nothing critical is missing.

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 100% across all 10 parameters, including the 'latest' sentinel values, filter field allowlist and limit behavior, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only loosely gestures at session types without adding syntax, defaults, or combination guidance beyond the schema.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Find sessions') and enumerates the session types returned, so an agent knows this is the session-level discovery endpoint rather than the meeting-level one. It does not explicitly name get_meetings as the alternative, so sibling differentiation is implied by the domain vocabulary rather than stated.

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?

'Use this to get a session_key, which most other tools need' is a concrete usage directive that tells the agent exactly why and when to call this before downstream tools. There is no explicit when-not guidance or named alternative for cases where the agent already has a session_key.

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