Get XDaLa session start handoff

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Read-only; does not sign, submit, or execute,' which is clear about side effects. However, it does not mention error handling, authentication needs, or what happens if the handle does not exist. More detail could be expected given no annotations.

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 three sentences and front-loaded with purpose. The first sentence lists the retrieved components, the second clarifies read-only behavior, and the third gives usage guidance. It is efficient but could be slightly more streamlined. Overall, it conveys essential information without 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?

For a tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description lists the data fields returned, which is helpful. However, it does not explain the parameter or error conditions. Given the complexity of the domain and many sibling tools, a more complete description including return format or typical usage would improve completeness.

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 input schema has one required parameter 'handle' with 0% schema coverage (no description). The description does not explain what 'handle' represents (e.g., session ID or handoff identifier). The tool name and title provide indirect context, but the description adds no explicit meaning to the parameter beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool reads stored handoff metadata and lists specific components (canonical request, authority, etc.). It explicitly says 'Read-only; does not sign, submit, or execute,' distinguishing it from mutation tools. Among sibling get_xdala_session_* tools, this one is uniquely about session start handoff, and the description highlights that.

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 provides specific usage guidance: 'Use sessionOwnership to avoid confusing the XRC-729 contract owner with the actual session owner/starter before Workbench completion.' This tells when to leverage the sessionOwnership field. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternative tools like get_xdala_session_detail or get_xdala_session_start_result, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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