send

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure, but it only states the basic action. It doesn't mention newline handling, blocking behavior, or effects on the session, leaving the agent uninformed about important operational traits.

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 a single, concise sentence that is immediately understandable. It avoids unnecessary words and front-loads the key action, though it sacrifices detail for brevity.

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?

With three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse to provide adequate context. It doesn't explain prerequisites (e.g., must have an open session), how the session_id is obtained, or how append_newline affects behavior, leaving significant gaps for an agent to safely invoke the tool.

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 low (33%), with only append_newline having any description. The tool description adds no meaning for data or session_id, and does not clarify how raw input is transmitted or what format data should take. The description fails to compensate for the schema's sparsity.

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 ('send') and resource ('session's stdin'), clearly conveying the tool's function. It distinguishes from siblings like 'run' or 'tmux_send_keys' by specifying raw input to a session's stdin, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'run' or 'tmux_send_keys'. The description simply states what it does without any contextual usage instructions or exclusions.

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