ketan_session_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a read-only aggregation, and 'markdown summary' plus the list of included data categories adds useful behavioral context. However, it does not explicitly state whether any state is modified, whether the summary is computed fresh, or any potential limitations.

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 two short, front-loaded sentences that immediately state what the tool returns and then list its main content categories. There is no filler or repetition of schema 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?

For a zero-parameter read-only summary tool with an output schema available, the description is complete. It names the output format, the scope of the summary, and the key tracked categories, leaving no significant gaps.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema already fully covers parameter semantics (100% coverage). The description correctly adds no parameter details because none are needed, matching the baseline of 4 for a zero-parameter tool.

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 verb 'Get' with the resource 'complete markdown summary of the Ketan-OS session' and explicitly enumerates the contained items (steps taken, checkpoints created, failures recorded, beliefs tracked). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on subsets like checkpoints or beliefs.

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 phrase 'complete ... session' plus the listing of all included components makes it clear this is the tool for a holistic overview, not a specific sub-slice. It does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools or exclusions, so it stops short of a 5, but the usage context is clear.

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