Read pending native session Inbox

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context about what is read (projection IDs plus original content) and that queued input differs from active execution, but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or empty-queue behavior. A 3 fits given the lighter burden.

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 with the verb and resource front-loaded and no filler. It is dense, jargon-heavy ("session.projections Inbox next-turn and next-step IDs") but every clause carries 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 one-parameter read-only tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description is nearly adequate. The remaining gaps are the undefined sessionId semantics and absent queue-ordering/empty-state behavior, which matter for correct interpretation of the returned list.

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 carry the semantics of sessionId and it does not — no format, length, or origin hints. The single parameter is only inferable from its self-evident name, leaving the low-coverage gap unaddressed.

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 (Read) and a well-defined resource (session.projections Inbox), plus the exact payload it surfaces: next-turn and next-step IDs and original content. It is clearly a queue-listing operation rather than a queue-mutation one, though it never names the mutating siblings (remove_queue_item, clear_session_queue).

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?

"Queued input is distinct from active execution" implies the tool is for inspecting pending work rather than running or steering it, which gives usable context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use, no prerequisites, and no sibling (e.g. read_session_context, clear_session_queue) is named as the alternative.

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