List authorized normalized source sessions with filters for tenant, project, group, and clearance. Use to inspect session records for auditing and debugging.
List authorized normalized source sessions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| clearance | No | restricted | |
| tenant_id | No | local | |
| project_id | No | ||
| groups_json | No | [] | |
| principal_id | No | local-user | |
| projects_json | No | [] |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List' implies a read-only operation, and 'authorized' hints at access filtering, but the description says nothing about pagination, ordering, permission requirements, or return 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 sentence with no wasted words, which is concise. However, it is under-specified for a tool with 7 parameters and no other documentation, so brevity comes at the expense of necessary detail.
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?
There is no output schema, no annotations, and zero parameter coverage, so the description is the only guidance available. 'List authorized normalized source sessions' is far too little for an agent to correctly construct a call or interpret results.
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 0% and the description mentions none of the 7 parameters. The defaults such as 'clearance=restricted', 'tenant_id=local', and 'principal_id=local-user' are opaque, and the JSON string parameters are left completely unexplained.
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') and identifies a resource ('authorized normalized source sessions'), making the core intent clear. However, it does not differentiate this tool from sibling tools like company_session_understand, and 'normalized source sessions' is somewhat jargon-heavy.
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 guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as company_session_understand or company_episodes_search. The description implies it is for listing sessions but provides no contextual cues, exclusions, or conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.