Start work session

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

Annotations provide no hints (all false), so the description carries the burden. It discloses that it returns a sessionId handle and a repository snapshot, and clarifies the budgetMinutes semantics. However, it doesn't explicitly state whether starting a session modifies the repository, whether it can overwrite an existing session, or whether the session starts executing immediately. No contradiction with annotations, but more detail on side effects would be helpful.

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 with the purpose. Each sentence contributes: purpose, mode definitions, and return value/next steps. It's efficient but somewhat dense, mixing mode semantics with workflow hints, so it's not a 5.

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 seven parameters, complete schema descriptions, and existing output schema, the description provides enough context for correct invocation. It specifies the required modes, budget requirement, return value, and next steps. It doesn't cover edge cases like session conflicts or failure modes, but these are partially addressed by the schema and output schema. A slightly deeper explanation of the session lifecycle would push this to a 5.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minor value by clarifying that budgetMinutes is the total wall-clock autonomy 'for the whole session, not per task,' which slightly disambiguates the schema's wording. It does not otherwise go beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 starts a work session for a project goal, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling session-management tools (pause, resume, stop) by being the entry point, but it doesn't explicitly name resume_session as the alternative for continuing an existing session, so it falls short of a 5.

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 gives clear guidance on selecting between 'outside' and 'desk' modes, including the budgetMinutes requirement for outside mode. It also suggests next steps, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus resume_session or other session tools, nor does it mention any preconditions like having no active session.

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