select_terminal

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

The description discloses that the change is session-only and persists until server restart. However, with no annotations, it does not mention potential side effects, required permissions, or behavior if multiple parameters are provided, leaving gaps.

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 very concise, with a clear first sentence stating the purpose, followed by brief parameter guidance. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given no output schema, no annotations, and 4 parameters, the description covers the tool's purpose and usage of most parameters but lacks details on the 'edition' parameter, error behavior, and return values, leaving some incompleteness.

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 description adds meaning for three parameters (origin, hash, install) beyond the empty schema, explaining that origin is from a file, hash is a folder name, and install auto-scans. However, the 'edition' parameter is not explained, and the input schema has 0% description coverage.

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 clearly states the verb 'Switch' and the resource 'active terminal data folder', and distinguishes from sibling tools like list_terminals or kill_terminal. It specifies the session scope and provides distinct options for the switch.

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 (when needing to change the terminal folder) and instructs to provide one of three options, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or specify when not to use it.

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