grok_agent_session_tick

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It reveals that the tool returns step, steps_left, budget_remaining, and force_end, and mentions that passing tool_used/step_done affects budget counting. However, it does not clarify whether the tool has side effects or requires specific permissions.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence with key details. It avoids unnecessary words and is 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?

The description lacks essential information about parameter meanings, usage context, and side effects. While it gives a basic idea of progress/budget tracking, it is incomplete for an agent to use confidently without additional 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 schema provides no descriptions for the five parameters, and the tool description only mentions tool_used and step_done (and verbose default). job_id and session_id are completely unexplained, leaving the agent without enough information to correctly populate them.

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 it is a 'compact progress + budget' tick for a session protocol, but it is somewhat vague about the exact action. It mentions returning progress metrics and passing tool_used/step_done to count budget, which gives a general idea but not a precise purpose.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool compared to the many sibling tools (e.g., session_begin, session_next, delegate_*). It lacks context on the typical workflow or scenarios where this tick is appropriate.

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