list_admin_sessions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that results cover GUI, SSH, and API logins, but says nothing about permissions required, whether session data is a live snapshot, rate limits, or how 'where from' is represented. For an unannotated tool this leaves major behavioral gaps.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is a fragment rather than a full sentence, but every word contributes and nothing is wasted.

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 simple read-only list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, this is minimally adequate. However, since there are no annotations and no output schema, the description could have clarified the read-only nature and what the session/location fields contain; that omission is a clear but non-critical gap.

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 coverage is 100% with a single optional 'vdom' parameter that the schema already documents with its default. The description adds no additional meaning about the VDOM parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 phrase 'Administrators currently logged in (GUI, SSH, API) and where from' names a specific resource (active admin sessions) and the login channels covered, which distinguishes it from siblings like list_sessions or get_system_status. It lacks an explicit verb, but the scope is unambiguous for a read-only listing.

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 on when to use this versus list_sessions, get_system_status, or other status-listing tools. The agent must infer the distinction from the description alone, with no stated conditions or exclusions.

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