msf_sessions_list

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation is read-only ('List') and states the return payload (type, target host, session ID). This is sufficient for a simple listing tool, though it does not mention prerequisites like an active Metasploit connection.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the action verb 'List'. It contains no wasted words and includes return-value details without excessive formatting.

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?

Given the zero-parameter scope and presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's function and return value. It is complete for an AI agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the input schema is empty. The description correctly makes no parameter claims. Per the baseline for parameterless tools, a score of 4 is appropriate.

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 'List' and identifies the resource as 'all active Metasploit sessions', including session types (shells, meterpreter). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like msf_run_module and msf_session_cmd, which perform different actions.

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 description clearly states the tool lists active sessions, implying it is the tool to use for session enumeration. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it, but the context is clear. Sibling tools like msf_session_cmd suggest a workflow of listing first, then interacting.

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