openclaw_sessions_compaction_get

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It declares 'Read-only', which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not describe potential errors, permissions, or exactly what the snapshot data contains.

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: three short sentences (or fragments) that immediately convey purpose, wrapper nature, and read-only trait. No wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description does not specify the return value, but the tool's simplicity (fetching a snapshot) makes this acceptable. Overall, it is nearly complete for a read-only retrieval tool.

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 100%, so the description adds no extra parameter detail beyond what is already in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Fetch a specific compaction snapshot by id' and 'Read-only', clearly identifying the action and resource. Among siblings like list, restore, branch, this tool is uniquely the getter.

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 parameter description for 'id' instructs to get the id from openclaw_sessions_compaction_list, providing clear context to use list first. However, no explicit when-not or alternative guidance is given beyond this.

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