Switches your view to a specified agent’s pane and marks that agent’s completion as seen, so you can inspect current output and clear pending completion status.
Switch the user's view to an agent's pane and mark its completion as seen.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| target | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The phrase 'mark its completion as seen' usefully discloses the extra state mutation that justifies the non-idempotent, non-read-only annotations. However, nothing is said about what happens when the target agent is still running, whether the 'seen' flag is reversible, or what permissions are required.
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?
A single tight sentence with the primary action front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though the compression contributes to the missing parameter detail.
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 returns need not be explained, and the mutation is disclosed. The remaining gaps are the undefined 'target' argument and the absent routing guidance for a tool that mutates UI state.
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% and the required 'target' parameter is left completely undefined. The description hints that it identifies an agent, but never says whether it is an agent ID, a pane ID, or a name, so an agent cannot reliably construct the call from the text.
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?
States a concrete verb and resource: switching the user's view to an agent's pane and clearing its completion indicator. It is reasonably distinguishable from workspace_focus and tab_focus by the 'agent's pane' scoping, though it does not explicitly say how it relates to those siblings.
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 on when to use this rather than agent_get, agent_read, pane_read, or the workspace/tab focus tools. The agent must infer that this is for navigating the UI to a specific agent rather than inspecting its output.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.