Inspect session

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the list of inspected data fields, but it does not disclose staleness, caching, error behavior, or any prerequisites beyond what the schema provides.

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 a single telegraphic sentence that front-loads the core content immediately. Every listed item adds information, and there is no filler or repetition of the tool name.

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?

With an output schema present, one fully documented parameter, and read-only annotations, the description is sufficient for correct invocation. The only minor gap is not clarifying how this relates to get_session_report, but that falls under optional usage routing rather than essential invocation context.

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 fully documents sessionId as the required session handle returned by start_session (100% coverage). The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names the specific resource ('one session') and the exact data returned: state, mode, budget, unit counts, in-flight units, and run history. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like list_sessions, start_session, and get_session_report.

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 implies use when inspecting a single session's current state, but it gives no explicit when/when-not guidance or named alternatives. A capable agent can infer the use case, but the routing is not made explicit.

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