list_panes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates a read-only enumeration operation by using 'List every pane,' and it adds meaningful context about the id format that an agent must know. It does not discuss ordering or completeness guarantees, but for a simple listing tool this disclosure is solid.

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?

Two tightly scoped sentences. The first states exactly what is returned, and the second adds the essential id format needed to use other pane tools. No filler or redundant wording.

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 zero-argument listing tool with an output schema, the description is perfectly adequate. It tells the agent what to call, what it will get, and how to recognize pane ids for later calls. Nothing essential is missing.

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 tool accepts zero parameters, so schema describes everything. The description's enumeration of returned fields is useful context for the agent, but not required for parameter understanding. Baseline 4 for a zero-parameter tool is appropriate.

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 ('List') and a clear resource ('every pane') while enumerating the exact fields returned: id, workspace, tab, cwd, title, and agent status. This cleanly distinguishes list_panes from sibling tools like list_tabs and list_workspaces.

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 second sentence — 'Pane ids ... are the target of every pane tool' — implies that list_panes should be used to discover pane ids before targeting other pane-tools. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, so the guidance remains implied.

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