tester_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 the HTTP endpoint, the need for KLAXON_ENGINE_URL, the read-only nature, and the lifecycle of sessions (recreated on policy import). This is thorough behavioral disclosure beyond what any schema could convey.

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 detailed but every sentence earns its place. It front-loads the core purpose, then explains the failure mode, the API call, the URL requirement, and the design rationale. Slightly long but justified given the complexity and lack of annotations.

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 tool's complexity (internal API, environment variable requirement, misleading error behavior), the description covers everything an agent needs: what it does, when to use it, how it works, and why alternatives are absent. The output schema exists, so return format is covered elsewhere. Complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does: it explains the only parameter 'action' supports only 'list'. This fully documents the parameter's meaning and constraints, though it could have been more explicit about the default value. Still, it adds significant value beyond the bare 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?

The description clearly states the tool lists Wazuh 5 engine test sessions, which are the environments logtest can use. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explaining its role relative to logtest and the internal API. The verb 'list' and resource 'test sessions' are specific and unambiguous.

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 explicitly explains when to use this tool: to discover which environments exist and whether they are enabled, especially when logtest returns a misleading success response. It also explains why create/delete/reload tools are not provided, preventing misuse. This is exemplary usage guidance.

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