session_record_list

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: it lists both running and finished recordings, specifies the return shape, and notes the T3rnel Browser extension requirement. No contradiction with 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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence carries useful information: what it lists, why a caller would use it, what it returns, and what it requires. There is no redundancy or filler.

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 listing tool, the description is complete: it names the dependent sibling tools, describes the output fields, includes both active and finished recordings, and notes the runtime dependency. No output schema exists, so the detailed return description is especially valuable.

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 schema is empty, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. The description appropriately focuses on the return shape rather than inputs; the baseline of 4 applies.

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 a specific action and resource ('List every recording, running or finished') and clearly differentiates the tool's purpose as locating the id needed by session_record_events and session_record_replay. This makes the tool's role among many session siblings immediately understandable.

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 gives clear context: the caller should use this tool when they need a recording id for session_record_events or session_record_replay. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative listing tools, but the intended usage is nonetheless clear.

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