session_turn

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one real behavior: the full result is persisted locally while max_chars bounds what enters MCP context. However, it says nothing about timeout behavior, what happens on an invalid or expired session_id, or error/recovery semantics.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the one non-obvious behavioral fact. No filler.

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?

No output schema and no annotations means the description is the only source of behavior, and it leaves the return content, timeout_sec effect, and failure modes unaddressed. Adequate for the core action but incomplete for a 4-param, non-annotated 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 0%, so the description must compensate for all four params. It explains max_chars meaningfully (context budgeting vs. local full result), but session_id, prompt, and timeout_sec get no added semantics beyond their names.

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 a specific verb and resource ('send one prompt to a warm session'), which is distinct from open_session/close_session/submit_job siblings. It doesn't explicitly name or route against any alternative tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

'Warm session' implies a session must already be open (via open_session) before calling this, but that prerequisite is left to inference. No when-not guidance, no mention of what to do with a cold or expired session.

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