replay_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, establishing a safe, read-only operation. The description adds behavioral context by specifying what kind of data is returned and that it represents a snapshot of session activity, substantially contributing beyond the structured annotations.

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 sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Current session summary') and then lists the relevant informational fields efficiently. Every part contributes value with no redundancy.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only status tool, the description is sufficiently complete. It tells the agent what the tool returns and the scope ('current session'); no output schema exists, but the textual list of contents covers the relevant context for invoking and interpreting the call.

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 schema description coverage is 100%. With no parameters to document, the baseline of 4 applies since there is no schema ambiguity and no need for additional parameter-related guidance.

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 uses a clear resource ('current session') and lists concrete artifacts it returns (objective, status, checkpoint/event counts, last activity). However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling tools like replay_sessions or replay_stats, though 'current session' narrows its scope.

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 implies when to use the tool: whenever a summary of the current session is needed. It does not state exclusions or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer when a sibling like replay_sessions or replay_checkpoint is more appropriate.

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