terminal_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description consistently describes a read-only listing operation. It adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations by noting that exited sessions still count toward the eight-session limit until closed, which is important for capacity planning and not inferable from the annotations alone.

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 sentence that front-loads the core action and output fields, then attaches a relevant capacity-limit note. Every clause earns its place with no filler or redundancy.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description shoulders the burden of describing return values and does so by listing all key fields (IDs, commands, working directories, dimensions, and process status). It also covers the important boundary condition about exited sessions and the eight-session limit, making the tool fully usable without external context.

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 takes zero parameters, so the input schema carries no parameter documentation burden. The description appropriately focuses on what is listed rather than on inputs; with no params, a baseline of 4 is appropriate and the description does not need to add parameter meaning.

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') with a specific resource ('retained terminal sessions') and enumerates the exact data returned (IDs, commands, working directories, dimensions, process status). This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools, which start, snapshot, input, resize, or close sessions.

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 makes the tool's purpose obvious and implies use when an agent needs to inspect existing terminal sessions, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or what conditions might exclude its use. There are no exclusions or alternative routing, so usage guidance is only implied rather than explicit.

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