get_session_trace

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. Description adds value by disclosing that trace is in-process only and resets on server restart, and clarifies that include_open_images appends current windows without adding an extra trace row. No contradictions.

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 with front-loaded key information. Each sentence adds essential context without redundancy.

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 presence of an output schema, description need not explain return values. Parameters are fully covered, and behavioral constraints (in-process only) are stated. No gaps in completeness for this 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 coverage is 100% so baseline is 3. Description adds context: limit is 'Max recent events to return' (redundant but clear), and include_open_images notes it shares data with list_open_images and does not add a new row, enhancing understanding beyond schema.

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 'Return recent tool invocations' with specific examples like run_macro and open_image, and mentions optional live open-image list. It distinguishes itself from siblings by noting that include_open_images provides same data as list_open_images.

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?

Description implies usage for debugging or monitoring recent actions but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives. It mentions the in-process limitation which is a usage constraint, but no comparative guidance with siblings like clear_session_trace.

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