Switch the running session to another task

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals important behavioral traits: time is split 'honestly' between tasks and total time is conserved, which helps the agent understand the impact of the switch. However, it does not mention side effects or prerequisites beyond the session being active.

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 concise and well-structured: the first sentence states the core action, the second adds behavioral context and usage guidance. No superfluous content, and key information is front-loaded.

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?

For a simple single-parameter tool without an output schema, this description covers the essential information: what it does, when to use it, and the behavioral implication of time conservation. It falls short only in not explicitly clarifying the parameter semantics, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 schema provides no description coverage (0%), and the tool description does not elaborate on the 'task_id' parameter. While the action implies task_id is the destination task, the description fails to explicitly state which task the ID refers to, leaving room for ambiguity.

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 clearly specifies the verb 'move' and the resource 'the active session's open segment', explicitly stating that it moves to a different task. This distinguishes it well from the sibling dwt_start_session, which starts a new 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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Use this instead of dwt_start_session when a session is already running.' This provides a clear condition and names the alternative, leaving no ambiguity about the intended use case.

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