Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
tmux-bridge-mcp

tmux-bridge-mcp

by howardpen9
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

tmux_read

Retrieve recent terminal output from a tmux pane to prepare context before typing or sending keys.

Instructions

Read the last N lines from a tmux pane. Must be called before type/keys (read guard). Target can be a pane ID (%N), session:window.pane, or a label.

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": "tmux_read"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
linesNoNumber of lines to read (default 50)
targetYesPane target: ID (%0), session:win.pane, or label

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read guard (ordering requirement) but does not mention that the tool is read-only, or any permissions needed. For a simple read tool, this is adequate but could note non-destructive nature.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence earns its place: purpose, read guard, target formats. 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?

Given the tool's low complexity (2 params, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage order, target specification, and default line count. No obvious gaps.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% (both params have descriptions). The description adds value by explaining 'last N lines' (reads from end) and clarifying target formats beyond schema, e.g., 'pane ID (%N), session:window.pane, or a label'.

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?

The description clearly states 'Read the last N lines from a tmux pane' (specific verb+resource) and distinguishes from siblings like tmux_type (typing) and tmux_list (listing). The target formats and read guard further clarify its role.

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?

Explicitly states the ordering constraint 'Must be called before type/keys (read guard)' and enumerates valid target formats. Does not provide explicit when-not-to-use advice, but the constraint is strong guidance.

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