Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
tmux-mcp

tmux-mcp

by fr1sk
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

list_panes

List panes in a tmux session or window, returning index, size, status, and command. Automatically selects a single pane or prompts for choice among multiple.

Instructions

List panes in a tmux target. Pass a session name ('work') or session:window ('work:0'). When only a session name is passed, lists all panes across all windows in that session. Returns pane index, size, active status, and running command. If there is only one pane, auto-select it without asking. If multiple, present them as choices and ask the user which pane to use.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "target": "<target>"
    },
    "name": "list_panes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetYesSession name or 'session:window'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.1

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses return values (pane index, size, active status, running command) and decision logic (auto-select if one pane, present choices if multiple).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Description is concise but comprehensive, front-loaded with main purpose, and every sentence adds value. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a listing tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers input format, return information, and behavioral aspects. No gaps remain.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Only one parameter 'target' with schema coverage 100%. The description adds significant context beyond schema: explains different behaviors depending on whether target is session name or session:window, which is valuable for correct invocation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states it lists panes in a tmux target, specifies target format (session name or session:window), and differentiates from sibling tools like list_sessions and list_windows.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Describes when to use (to list panes) and how the target parameter affects scope (all windows vs specific window). Does not explicitly state when not to use or compare directly with siblings, but the context is clear.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools