Get current CLI auth session

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds the HTTP method and endpoint, plus authorization class 'board', which provides some context beyond annotations. However, it does not detail what happens when no session exists or the exact response structure.

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?

Extremely concise: two short sentences. First sentence makes purpose immediately clear. Second sentence provides the endpoint and authorization context without any fluff.

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 zero parameters and the existence of an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and technical details. The authorization class provides useful context. Minor gap: no mention of expected output or potential error states, but the output schema likely handles that.

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?

No parameters in schema, so baseline is 4. The description accurately reflects this and adds no unnecessary information. The schema coverage is 100%.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get current CLI auth session' as a specific verb+resource combination. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools that modify auth (e.g., pc_post_cli_auth_challenges) based on the read-only nature.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus other CLI auth tools. While 'Get' implies read-only, there is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., having an active CLI session) or when not to use it.

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