list_sessions_open

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the endpoint 'GET /api/sessions/open' which confirms the HTTP method, but it does not describe what 'open' means or any behavioral nuances. Since annotations handle the main safety traits, a 3 is appropriate.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single phrase plus the endpoint. It is front-loaded and does not waste words. However, it is so minimal that it borders on under-specification, but since it is a simple GET with no parameters, conciseness is acceptable. A 4 reflects its efficiency without extra clutter.

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 that a GET request with no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is functionally sufficient for an agent to call the tool. The agent knows it is a read-only operation, and the output schema defines the return format. However, it does not clarify what constitutes an 'open' session, which could cause ambiguity, but that is a semantic gap rather than a missing invocation detail.

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 has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100% (empty properties). With no parameters to describe, the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and no additional meaning is required.

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 'Get sessions open' essentially restates the tool name 'list_sessions_open' with a synonymous verb ('get' vs 'list') and the same resource. It adds no distinction from siblings like list_sessions or list_me_sessions, and does not clarify what 'open' means. This is a tautology that fails to convey new information.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it returns only open sessions, nor does it differentiate from list_sessions or list_me_sessions. The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone.

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