aiworkhub_dashboard_sessions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with concrete evidence of what is untouched ("never modifies session checkpoints or access state") and which store it reads (canonical transcript SQLite, opened read-only). Missing only secondary details like ordering guarantees or how the limit interacts with output, so not a 5.

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?

Two short sentences, with the read-only constraint and scope front-loaded before the sibling routing guidance. Every sentence earns its place; nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations verbatim beyond a useful reinforcement of read-only behavior.

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?

An output schema exists and annotations cover the safety profile, so the description needn't explain return values; purpose, scope, and alternatives are all present. Slightly short of complete because it doesn't say anything about what a 'transcript document' contains or how results are ordered relative to the limit, which would help an agent interpret the call.

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 single 'limit' parameter is fully documented in the schema (default 100, clamped to 1..500, meaning of the value), so the schema carries the weight. The description says "newest" documents, which implicitly confirms ordering, but adds no further parameter meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate at 100% coverage.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("list the newest Session Manager transcript documents") plus scope ("for the active repository"). It also explicitly contrasts itself against aiworkhub_dashboard_memory and aiworkhub_dashboard_kb, so an agent can distinguish it from the nearest siblings without opening schemas.

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?

Gives both the positive trigger ("inspect recent session continuity documents") and the alternatives with their conditions (memory for durable keys, kb for Knowledge Base articles). No inference is required to route between the three dashboard read tools.

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