dsh_search_sessions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it discloses that no raw snippets/reasoning/tool logs are returned, that a bounded recent-history scan may occur, and that coverage is reported via next_scan_offset/incomplete_session_ids. It also negates side effects explicitly. It omits auth/rate-limit details, but for a read-only search tool this is strong behavioral disclosure.

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: the core purpose appears in the first sentence, followed by the most important behavioral caveat. Each sentence earns its place, though some jargon like 'next_scan_offset' and 'incomplete_session_ids' is introduced without elaboration.

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?

The description covers purpose, return scope, fallback behavior, and side-effect negation, which makes it usable. However, with no output schema and 0% parameter coverage, the failure to explain all five input parameters—especially the distinction between limit and max_sessions—leaves a clear gap for an agent trying to invoke the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only meaningfully explains the query term and hints that cwd can narrow the search. The parameters limit, max_sessions, and scan_offset are left unexplained, and the two limit-like parameters are not disambiguated. Mentioning next_scan_offset (an output field) does not clarify the input scan_offset.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Find existing DSH sessions') and the two search modes ('by title or literal content keyword'). It differentiates itself from sibling tools by explicitly noting it returns compact metadata and does not send messages or run a model, so an agent can distinguish it from dsh_list_sessions and dsh_send_message.

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 usage context: it explains the fallback when full-text indexing is disabled, directs the agent to narrow keywords/cwd when has_more, and explicitly states what the tool does NOT do ('Does not send messages or run a model'). It does not name sibling alternatives directly, but the exclusions and operational guidance make intended usage clear.

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