sofa_session_summary

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses the 'append exactly once' behavior, which is valuable. But it does not mention whether the tool is read-only or has any side effects, leaving a degree of behavioral opacity.

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 only two sentences with no wasted words, starting with the core purpose and then giving an unambiguous rule. Every sentence serves a practical purpose.

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 empty input schema and absence of an output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (session summary) and the critical compact_text handling rule. There is mild ambiguity about where compact_text appears and what 'projected' means, but it is still usable for an agent.

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 tool has zero parameters and the empty schema fully captures the call contract, so the baseline level is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, which is appropriate because there are no parameters to clarify.

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 the resource ('activity summary for the current session') and a concrete handling rule, which makes the tool's role reasonably clear. However, it lacks an explicit verb and does not differentiate it from sibling tools like sofa_close_session or sofa_guidance.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this tool versus the many sibling tools, nor any when-not-to-use direction. The 'append compact_text' instruction tells the agent what to do with the output, but it does not help select the tool.

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