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

tmux-bridge-mcp

by howardpen9
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

tmux_resolve

Resolve a tmux pane's target ID by its label to identify and direct communications between panes.

Instructions

Look up a pane's target ID by its 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": {
      "label": "<label>"
    },
    "name": "tmux_resolve"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
labelYesLabel to resolve

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without revealing whether it is read-only, what happens on failure, or any side effects. The tool's behavior is opaque.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single concise sentence with no unnecessary words. However, it could be slightly more structured to include key behavioral details while remaining brief.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The description is underspecified. It does not explain what a 'target ID' is, what the output format looks like, or any error handling. Given the tool has one parameter and no output schema, more context is needed for an agent to use it correctly.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The schema description for 'label' is 'Label to resolve', and the tool description adds no additional meaning beyond 'by its label'. Since schema coverage is 100%, baseline is 3, and no extra value is provided.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Look up a pane's target ID by its label'. It uses a specific verb ('look up') and specifies the resource ('pane's target ID'), effectively distinguishing it from siblings like tmux_name or tmux_id.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives like tmux_name or tmux_id. The description lacks any context about prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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