get_research_session

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), the description discloses critical behavioral details: session persistence (4 hours, survives restarts), the always-'summary' responseMode for overviews, the sliding window of last 3 steps, and the semantics of foundInStep (1-indexed, absent for non-numbered steps). These are not in the annotations and are essential for correct usage.

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 dense yet well-organized, with the core purpose front-loaded in the first sentence and each subsequent sentence adding necessary detail. While it is lengthy, the complexity of the tool justifies the length; there is no filler or redundant information.

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 complexity and that an output schema exists, the description covers all critical operational aspects: purpose, parameter behavior, response mode distinctions, data semantics, and persistence guarantees. No significant gaps remain for an agent to call 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 100%, so both parameters are documented. The description adds semantic value by clarifying the behavioral consequence of stepId (returns responseMode 'step') and the edge case that foundInStep has no step 0, which are not explicit in the schema. This goes beyond a simple baseline of 3.

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's purpose: 'Recover a sequential_search research session after context loss.' This is a specific verb-resource pair that directly conveys what the tool does and differentiates it from sibling search tools like sequential_search by focusing on session recovery.

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?

Explicitly states when to use the tool ('after context loss') and explains the distinction between the overview responseMode and sequential_search's threshold logic. It also provides guidance on when to pass stepId ('For full details of any earlier step'), offering clear conditional usage.

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