tmux_new_window

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core creation action, omitting side effects (e.g., whether the new window becomes active), failure modes, permissions, or any other behavioral traits. This is a significant gap for a tool that creates resources.

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 concise single sentence, front-loading the action and resource. It wastes no words. However, it adds little beyond the tool name itself, providing only minimal information, so it is not a perfect score.

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 tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description is sparse. It fails to mention behavior regarding session defaults, command execution, or error handling. The agent receives insufficient context to confidently invoke the tool correctly in varied situations.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for all three parameters (name, command, session) with 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 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 clearly states the action ('Create') and the resource ('a new window in a tmux session'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like tmux_list_windows, tmux_kill_window, and tmux_split_window by specifying a new window creation rather than listing, killing, or 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as tmux_split_window or tmux_send_keys. It also lacks context about prerequisites, default session behavior, or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name and description.

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