set_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states what the tool sets, but does not mention mutability, side effects (e.g., disconnects other features), idempotency, or authentication requirements. The lack of detail on consequences of setting 'blocked' or 'done' leaves the agent uninformed.

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, efficient sentence that conveys the essential information without any filler. It front-loads the action and values, minimizing cognitive load.

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 that an output schema is present (handling return values), the description adequately covers the tool's core purpose and valid parameters. However, it omits context like how 'this session' is identified (assumed from connection) and whether multiple statuses are allowed, but these are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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 schema defines 'status' as a string with no enum constraint, so the description compensates by listing the exact allowed values ('active | idle | blocked | done'). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema, though it could be improved by specifying case sensitivity or default behavior.

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 action ('Set this session's status') and explicitly lists the allowed values ('active | idle | blocked | done'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'heartbeat' or 'update_objective' by focusing on session lifecycle states.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or postconditions. For example, it doesn't clarify that this should be used instead of 'heartbeat' for changing session state, nor does it indicate if there are dependencies.

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