List work sessions

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the description does not need to reiterate safety. It adds value by disclosing the ordering (newest first), the included fields, and the default behavior of includeTerminal (via schema, but the description does not mention the default). The description does not contradict annotations. Given the annotations, a score of 4 is appropriate for going beyond them with ordering and filter details.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the primary purpose and then adds a usage hint. Every word is useful, with no redundancy or filler. It is concise and well-structured.

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 complexity (a simple list operation with 2 optional parameters), the description is sufficient. An output schema exists (though not shown in the prompt, it is indicated), so the description does not need to explain return values. The description covers what the tool does, how results are ordered, and when to use it. Minor gaps: it does not mention what happens if no sessions exist or how pagination works, but these are not critical for basic usage.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents both parameters, including defaults. The description does not add any parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides. Thus, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'lists recorded sessions' with a specific ordering (newest first) and included fields (state, budget, open decision counts). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_session, which likely retrieves a single session. The purpose is unambiguous and actionable.

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 says 'Use to find a session to inspect or resume,' which provides clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though siblings like get_session or get_session_report are implied. This is a minor gap.

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