Send To Visible Claude Code TUI

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

Without annotations, the description must carry the burden. It discloses that the tool pastes the prompt and returns immediately with an attach command, which is key non-obvious behavior. However, it does not disclose potential side effects such as file modifications or tool execution by Claude Code, nor does it mention permission policies or stop-losses.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the key return behavior. Every word earns its place.

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 the tool has 16 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal but does explain the return value (tmux attach command). However, it lacks prerequisite context (e.g., existing TUI session) and doesn't mention the backend flexible options or interplay with sibling tools, which is a gap for a complex 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level information, but the schema already documents all 16 parameters with clear descriptions, including enums and defaults. No additional clarification is needed.

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 ('Paste') and resource ('persistent native Claude Code TUI'), and explicitly notes the immediate return of the tmux attach command. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like companion_tui_open or companion_send.

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. It does not mention that an existing TUI session is needed or that companion_tui_open should be used to create one. The only implied context is 'persistent,' but there are no explicit exclusions or alternative references.

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