karea_list_sessions

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It declares 'Read-only' and lists output fields, but lacks details on pagination, ordering, error handling, or authorization requirements. Basic safety is covered but not comprehensive.

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 sentences: first states purpose and fields, second states read-only nature. No extraneous text, front-loaded with key information.

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 simplicity (2 params, no nested objects, no output schema), the description covers purpose, input format, return fields, and safety. Missing details like ordering (e.g., by last active) or default behavior when projectId omitted, but largely 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 covers both parameters with descriptions. The description adds meaningful context: acceptable formats for 'task' (name, visual ID, UUID) and the role of 'projectId' for resolving visual IDs. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' and resource 'AI coding sessions linked to a task', and explicitly enumerates returned fields (provider, sessionId, etc.). It clearly distinguishes from sibling list tools (e.g., karea_list_tasks) and related tools like karea_link_session.

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 implies usage when needing to retrieve sessions associated with a task, but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. No mention of comparing with karea_link_session/unlink_session or other list tools.

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