open_terminal_tab

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that this opens a visible tab for long-running work and directs reuse through send_to_session, but it does not explain lifecycle effects such as whether the tab persists, how to clean it up, or what happens after opening.

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?

Three tightly written sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by selection guidance. Every sentence earns its place by clarifying when to use this tool and which sibling to use instead.

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 two-parameter tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage conditions, and alternatives well enough to invoke it correctly. It could mention lifecycle cleanup or resource implications, but those are secondary to correct selection.

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 100%, and both parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds only the notion that the tab is 'named' and gives usage examples, but does not add syntax, defaults, or constraints beyond the schema.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Open a new named terminal tab.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from command-execution and session-reuse siblings, so an agent can identify its role without inspecting the schema.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance ('ONLY use for long-running commands that need their own visible tab'), concrete examples (builds, installs, servers, cloning repos), and named alternatives for quick commands and existing sessions. Nothing important is left to inference.

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