tmux_close_session

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the action is destructive ('Kill') and limited to sessions created by this server, but does not explain side effects (e.g., whether attached clients are disconnected, if data is lost, or if the operation is irreversible). This is thin for a destructive tool.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action and target, and contains no wasted words. It is concise, though it could benefit from a bit more detail without losing conciseness.

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 simple one-parameter tool, the description is minimally adequate, but the destructive nature and lack of annotations or output schema mean more context is needed. The description does not explain return values, error handling, or prerequisites, making it incomplete for safe invocation.

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 schema has a single required parameter 'session_id' with no description, and the tool description offers no explanation of what this ID represents or its format. With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, but it does not address the parameter at all.

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 action ('Kill') and the resource ('a tmux session created by this server'), which distinguishes it from generic session operations. The phrase 'created by this server' narrows the scope. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'close_session', leaving some ambiguity.

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 the tool is for killing tmux sessions but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like 'close_session' or 'open_session'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, so the agent gets minimal context for selecting this tool over others.

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