list_tabs

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly conveys the non-mutating listing nature, the scope ('across the session'), and the tab id format (`a``w17:t1`), which helps agents reason about the return values. It does not hint at any side effects or require deeper behavioral warnings for such a simple read-only 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 only two short sentences, with the primary purpose in the first sentence and a practical output detail in the second. There is no fluff, and every sentence serves a clear role in helping an agent understand the tool.

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-parameter listing tool that also has an output schema available, the description is essentially complete. It tells the agent what action to perform, the scope to expect, and the shape of the returned tab identifiers. There is no missing information needed to invoke this tool correctly.

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 has zero parameters and the input schema is empty, so there are no parameters for the description to explain. The schema_description_coverage is vacuous 100%, which gives a baseline of 4; the description's tab id format is unrelated to input semantics but adds output context.

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 states the action clearly: 'List tabs across the session'. It identifies the exact resource (tabs) and a session scope, which helps distinguish this from sibling tools like list_panes and list_workspaces. However, it does not explicitly call out the alternative tools or the distinction, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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 that this tool is used when you need the list of tabs in the current session, and the session scoping provides useful context. It gives no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives guidance and does not mention list_panes, list_workspaces, or exclusion conditions.

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