kilter_get_sessions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: sessions are grouped by calendar day, ordered newest first, and the limit defaults to 5. It also discloses that each session includes every climb logged that day, which is a meaningful behavioral trait beyond the schema.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core function, the second gives usage context, and the third lists return contents and the default. Every sentence earns its place with no 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 tool's simplicity (1 optional parameter, no nested objects, output schema present), the description is nearly complete. It covers what the tool returns, when to use it, and the default limit. It doesn't describe pagination or the exact output schema structure, but the output schema exists and the tool is simple enough that this is a minor gap.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does mention 'limit defaults to 5' and implies the limit controls how many sessions are returned. However, it doesn't explicitly state that limit is the only parameter or describe edge cases (e.g., null limit behavior), but for a single optional parameter with a default, the description provides enough meaning.

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 states a specific verb ('Return'), a clear resource ('recent climbing sessions'), and a defining characteristic ('entries grouped by calendar day, newest first'). It also lists the content of each session (angles, sends, flashes, attempts, hardest send, every climb logged that day), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like kilter_get_logs or kilter_get_sends.

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 description explicitly says when to use this tool: 'when the user asks how their last session went, what they climbed yesterday, or wants to compare sessions.' This provides clear context and implicitly distinguishes it from alternatives like kilter_get_hardest_sends or kilter_get_progression, which would be used for different questions.

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