list_sessions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only states 'list all' with optional filtering, but does not mention whether it is read-only, whether it returns all sessions across users, or any rate limits or side effects. The default limit of 20 is not disclosed in the description, leaving important behavioral traits unaddressed.

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: 'List all research sessions with optional filtering.' It is front-loaded with the action, contains no filler, and is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 tool is simple with two optional parameters fully documented in the schema, and the description conveys the core purpose. However, there is no output schema and no mention of return format, pagination behavior, or what fields are included. The absence of annotations and the lack of detail in the description leave some gaps, but the schema compensates for parameter information.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters (limit and status), so the baseline is 3. The description's 'optional filtering' adds no specific detail beyond what the schema provides. It does not name the filters or explain their usage, so it adds minimal value over the schema.

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 research sessions and mentions optional filtering. This distinguishes it from siblings like start_research and get_research_status, which create or retrieve individual sessions. The verb 'list' and resource 'research sessions' are specific and unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of get_research_status for single-session status, no exclusions, and no context indicating whether it should be used for active sessions only. The intended use is only implied by the name.

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