riseup_session_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose real behavioral detail: it is a state-inspection read, it exposes a since/until window, and the sign-in link is returned conditionally (only when not signed in). It does not explicitly state read-only semantics or that no side effects occur, which is the remaining gap.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the core state question and then the returned attributes; every clause adds information and none is wasted.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description must convey the response shape, and it does: sign-in status, start, expiry, and the link on failure. Only minor detail is missing (e.g. that the window represents token/session validity and what a signed-out record contains).

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the schema or description to document beyond the empty object; baseline 4 applies.

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 the specific resource (this server's RiseUp sign-in session) and the exact payload it reports: signed-in state, validity window, and the sign-in link when signed out. That clearly separates it from riseup_login and riseup_logout, though the verb is implicit ('whether...since when...until when') rather than an explicit 'returns/reports'.

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?

No explicit statement of when to call this versus riseup_login or other siblings. Usage is only implied: an agent can infer it is the pre-flight check for auth state and the place to get a sign-in link, but there is no when/when-not guidance or named alternative.

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