tmux_create_window

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and parameter purposes, but does not explain what happens if the session is invalid, whether the new window becomes active, how the command is executed, or any side effects/reversibility. This is a notable gap for a mutating 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 three sentences plus an Args list, zero waste. It leads with the core purpose and then lists parameters in a structured format. No redundant content.

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?

The description covers the basic operation and all parameters, but omits edge-case behavior and error handling. Since there is no annotation context or output schema description, an agent may be uncertain about failure modes or post-conditions. However, for a simple tool with one required parameter, this is a moderate gap, so a 3 is appropriate.

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 offers meaningful definitions for all three parameters: 'Target session name or ID' for session, 'Optional name for the new window' for name, and 'Optional command to run in the new window' for command. Since the schema itself contains no parameter descriptions, these explanations add semantic value and clarify the optional nature.

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 opens with 'Create a new window in an existing tmux session', which is a specific verb and resource with context. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like tmux_create_session (session-level creation) and tmux_split_window (panel splitting).

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 phrase 'in an existing tmux session' implies that this tool is for adding windows to already-created sessions, but it does not explicitly say when to use it over alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or equivalent tools. The usage guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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