Miyabi MCP Bundle

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'List' implies a read-only operation, the description doesn't specify whether this requires tmux to be running, what happens if the session parameter is invalid, whether output is paginated, or what format the results take. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral questions unanswered.

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, efficient sentence that communicates the core functionality without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple listing tool and front-loads the essential information. Every word earns its place in conveying what the tool does.

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 listing tool with 100% schema coverage but no annotations and no output schema, the description provides adequate basic information about what the tool does. However, it lacks important context about behavioral aspects (permissions, error conditions, output format) and doesn't help the agent understand when to choose this tool over similar tmux siblings. The absence of output schema means the description should ideally hint at return format, but it doesn't.

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% with the single parameter 'session' documented as 'Session name (optional)'. The description doesn't add any parameter information beyond what's in the schema. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3 even without additional param details in the description. The description doesn't explain what happens when session is omitted (lists all panes across all sessions) or provide examples of valid session names.

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 ('List') and resource ('panes in tmux windows') with additional context about what information is included ('with their dimensions and commands'). It distinguishes from some siblings like tmux_list_sessions and tmux_list_windows by specifying it lists panes rather than sessions or windows. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from tmux_pane_search which might also list panes with filtering.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are several tmux-related sibling tools (tmux_list_sessions, tmux_list_windows, tmux_pane_search, tmux_pane_capture, etc.) but the description doesn't indicate when this specific pane-listing tool is preferred over other pane-related tools or when it should be used in conjunction with session/window listing tools.

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