terminal_create

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

Annotations are all false, so they provide no safety or behavior info. The description adds important behavioral traits: persistence, dedicated tmux socket, survival across MCP restarts, and a per-lease limit. These go beyond the annotations and help the agent anticipate side effects.

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 five short sentences, each delivering distinct value: purpose, requirement, alias recommendation, limit, and persistence. No filler or repetition. The most important sentence comes first, making it easy to scan.

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 tool's moderate complexity (3 params, output schema), the description covers purpose, prerequisites, usage limit, and lifecycle behavior. Missing details like cwd semantics and what happens on limit violation are minor, and output schema covers return values. Overall adequate and well-rounded.

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 lease_id as a required identifier and recommends specific values for alias. However, it does not mention cwd at all, leaving that parameter's meaning unclear. Partial compensation but a notable gap for a third parameter.

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 begins with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a persistent bash PTY under the dedicated tmux socket.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like terminal_read or terminal_write. It also includes key constraints (requires lease_id, max 3 per lease) that further define its purpose.

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 provides prerequisites ('Requires lease_id'), usage limits ('Max 3 per lease'), and naming conventions ('Aliases main/app/debug recommended'). While it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like terminal_list or terminal_close, the context of creating a persistent session is clear.

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