Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• recent_sessionsB
  3.1/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, making the safety profile clear. The description adds value by specifying the output includes resume commands, but does not elaborate on other behavioral aspects.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous content.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given two optional parameters and no output schema, the description omits parameter details, making it incomplete for effective use without external context.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain parameters but fails to mention 'within_hours' or 'limit' at all, leaving their semantics unclear.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool lists recently-active sessions with a specific output format (resume commands), distinguishing it from sibling tools like session_tools and usage_summary.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as session_tools or usage_summary.

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

• usage_summaryA
  3.7/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds that the data is an 'API-equivalent estimate, local data only' and provides a table with advisory narrative. This adds useful behavioral context without contradicting annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single dense paragraph that could be broken into cleaner sections. While not overly long, it uses parentheticals and dashes that reduce readability. Concise but could be better structured.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given no output schema, the description adequately outlines the output as a 'table by day × models' plus narrative. It covers key parameters and their defaults. Missing explicit details about the exact shape or granularity of the output, but sufficient for an agent to understand what to expect.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is low (33%), but the description explains `scope` filtering and `insights` toggle. The `period` parameter is self-explanatory via enum values. The description offsets the schema gaps by clarifying the non-obvious behaviors of scope and insights.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool provides a summary of token usage ('What you spent, where it went, and what was slow') for Claude Code and Codex. It implicitly differentiates from siblings by focusing on aggregated data, but explicit comparison to `recent_sessions` or `refresh_data` is missing.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description explains the scope parameter's default behavior and the effect of 'all' vs 'auto', and mentions insights toggle, but does not advise when to prefer this tool over siblings or when not to use it. Contextual usage guidance is present but not comprehensive.

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

• session_toolsA
  4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already indicate the tool is read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying the metrics returned (call counts, response sizes, average latency), going beyond what annotations provide.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence that conveys the core purpose and output, with no extraneous information. It is front-loaded and efficient.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The description covers the purpose and output metrics but lacks parameter explanations and output format details. Given no output schema, an agent may need more context on the exact data structure. Adequate but with gaps.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. However, the description does not explain the 'session_id' or 'limit' parameters. It adds no meaning beyond what the schema provides (parameter names and types).

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states it provides a per-session breakdown of call counts, response sizes, and average latency, with a stated purpose of debugging slow/expensive sessions. This differentiates it from siblings like 'recent_sessions' and 'usage_summary'.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description explicitly says to use it to 'debug a slow/expensive session,' providing clear context for use. While it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, the context is sufficient for an agent to decide.

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

• subagent_costsA
  4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the tool is safe and idempotent. The description adds behavioral context by explaining the split and pairing with latency, and notes the need for prior data refresh. No contradictions with annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is three sentences and front-loads the primary function. It is clear and to the point, though the second sentence could be slightly more concise. Still, it earns its place without unnecessary verbosity.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool has three optional parameters and no output schema, the description adequately conveys what the tool returns (split spend, list of priciest sub-agents, latency pairing) and the prerequisite action. It is complete enough 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.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is only 33% (scope has a description). The tool description does not elaborate on the three parameters (limit, scope, period), leaving the agent to rely solely on schema defaults and enum options. This is insufficient given low coverage.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool splits spend into main-session vs sub-agent work, lists priciest sub-agents, and pairs with latency. It answers a specific question ('are my sub-agents worth what they cost') and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like usage_summary or recent_sessions by focusing on sub-agent cost analysis.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description advises running `refresh_data` or `ingest --force` to ensure older rows are tagged, providing a clear prerequisite. It also frames the tool's purpose as answering a specific cost-value question. However, it does not explicitly mention when to avoid this tool or suggest alternatives among siblings.

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

• refresh_dataA
  4.3/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds that it re-scans for new activity, which is consistent but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two short sentences, each adding value: first states the action, second provides usage context. No wasted words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple parameterless tool with annotations and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose and usage, leaving no gaps.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  No parameters exist, and schema coverage is 100%. Description does not need to add parameter info; baseline for 0 params is 4.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the verb 're-scan' and the resource 'local Claude Code / Codex JSONL', and implies its role as a preparatory refresh action, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like recent_sessions or usage_summary.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Explicitly says 'Run before other tools for up-to-the-minute numbers', providing clear usage context. Lacks explicit when-not or alternatives, but the guidance is strong.

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