get_terminal_output

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that ``last`` returns Claude's final answer while ``full`` returns the rendered scrollback, which is real behavioral content. It omits read-only confirmation, any permission/auth notes, and whether output is paginated or bounded.

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 written sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and immediately followed by the mode semantics. No filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the mode semantics are covered. What is missing is sibling differentiation (read_session_output) and any hint about terminal_id provenance, which matters given the crowded terminal/session tool family.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the ``mode`` values (last vs full), which is valuable, but says nothing about ``terminal_id`` (e.g. how to obtain it) and does not enumerate mode as a formal enum in the schema.

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 a specific verb+resource ("Read a terminal's output") and clarifies the two modes. However, it does not differentiate from the very close sibling read_session_output, leaving the agent to guess which terminal-output reader to use.

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 such as read_session_output or get_terminal_status. The mode semantics are explained, but no usage context or exclusions are provided.

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