live_session_cancel

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses idempotency, a key behavioral trait for retries, and mentions the two termination contexts. However, it does not explain side effects (e.g., whether session data is invalidated) or any permissions required, leaving some transparency 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?

The description is extremely concise, with only two clauses, and every word contributes meaning. It front-loads the primary action and adds idempotency as essential context. This is exemplary conciseness without losing informational value.

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?

The tool is simple, and the description covers its core purpose and idempotency. However, it does not describe the return value or error cases, and it omits any prerequisites (e.g., session must be active). Given the presence of sibling lifecycle tools, a fuller context would help agents avoid misuse.

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 50%; only idempotency_key has a schema description, while session_id does not. The tool description does not clarify session_id's semantics or format. Since the description does not compensate for the missing schema description, parameter understanding is incomplete.

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 explicitly states '中止 session' (terminate session), identifying the verb and resource. It also mentions two specific trigger scenarios (learner early end or system timeout), which distinguishes it from siblings like live_session_complete, which likely handles normal completion.

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 provides clear usage context: use when a session ends prematurely or times out. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the trigger scenarios imply when this tool is appropriate relative to completion tools.

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