find_in_sessions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, what permissions are required, whether it searches all panes or only active ones, or any side effects. Only the word 'Cerca' implies a non-mutating operation, but this is not explicit.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and contains no filler. However, for a tool with three parameters and no annotations, it is too terse to be considered appropriately sized—it omits essential context that would make the definition self-contained.

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?

The output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. But the description is incomplete given the tool's complexity: no parameter details, no usage guidance, and no behavioral transparency. An agent would struggle to invoke it correctly without opening the schema or guessing.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'regex' (pattern) and 'host' (alias), but adds no format or syntax details, and completely omits the 'lines' parameter. This leaves two parameters only vaguely addressed and one entirely undocumented.

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 ('Cerca' = search) and resource ('regex nelle pane delle sessioni tmux di un host'), clearly identifying the tool's function. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like capture_pane or session_history, so a 4 rather than 5.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., capture_pane, session_history, or run_command). There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or typical contexts, leaving the agent to infer usage entirely.

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