pane_list

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

Annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context by naming the fields returned and the optional workspace scoping, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, ordering, or other operational traits beyond what the annotations and output schema provide.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no redundant clauses. Every phrase contributes either the operation, the returned fields, or the optional scoping constraint.

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?

With one optional parameter, an output schema, and rich annotations, the description is nearly complete for correct invocation. It covers the operation, returned fields, and workspace scoping; only minor details such as ordering or pagination are unaddressed.

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 carry the burden for the single parameter. It does identify the parameter's purpose by saying 'optionally within one workspace', which maps to workspace_id and clarifies its optional nature, but it does not explain how to obtain or format a workspace ID.

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 and resource ('List panes') and names the returned fields (cwd, title, hosted agent, agent status), making the operation clear. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling 'pane_get', but the list-versus-single-record distinction is strongly implied.

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 phrase 'optionally within one workspace' clarifies that the tool can be used globally or scoped to a workspace, which is implied usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pane_get or workspace_list, nor does it state any exclusions.

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