tmux_select_pane

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states that the tool switches to a pane but does not explain side effects, error behavior, or whether it changes focus, which is vague for a tool that likely modifies the tmux session state.

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 extremely concise—a single phrase—which is efficient. However, it is under-specified, lacking any elaboration on usage or behavior. It earns a 4 because it is not bloated, but could be more informative without losing conciseness.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too minimal. It does not explain what 'switch' means in tmux context, how to interpret the target format, or what happens after invocation. There is no discussion of return values or error conditions, leaving the agent with insufficient context to fully understand the tool's effect.

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 provides a full description for the only parameter 'target' with an example, yielding 100% schema coverage. The tool description adds no additional detail beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding.

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 ('Switch') and the resource ('a pane'), which is specific enough to indicate the tool's core function. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like tmux_select_window, so it lacks explicit distinction.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or scenarios where this tool is preferred over others like tmux_select_window or tmux_send_keys.

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