Capture the last output lines from a tmux session or window to inspect command results and debug remote processes.
Cattura l'output di una sessione (ultime lines righe).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| alias | Yes | ||
| lines | No | ||
| window | No | ||
| session | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only hints that output is tail-limited. It says nothing about read-only safety, whether it reads scrollback or the visible pane, permissions, or side effects.
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?
A single short front-loaded sentence with no filler. The awkward 'ultime lines righe' mixing is a minor blemish rather than bloat.
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?
An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but for a four-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage and no annotations the description is far too thin to let an agent call it 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 0%, so the description must compensate for four parameters and it only gestures at 'lines' via the odd phrase 'ultime lines righe'. The required 'alias' and 'session' identifiers and the optional 'window' are left unexplained in both schema and description.
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 verb+resource: capturing a session's output. It is clear what the tool does, but it offers no differentiation from related siblings like session_history or find_in_sessions, which an agent could confuse with it.
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 use this versus session_history, find_in_sessions, or run_command. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.