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

tmux-bridge-mcp

by howardpen9
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

tmux_type

Types text into a tmux pane without pressing Enter. Requires reading the pane first to enforce a read guard.

Instructions

Type text into a tmux pane WITHOUT pressing Enter. You must tmux_read the pane first (read guard enforced). After typing, use tmux_read to verify, then tmux_keys to press Enter.

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>",
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "tmux_type"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesText to type into the pane
targetYesPane target: ID (%0), session:win.pane, or label

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool types without pressing Enter and mentions a read guard. While edge cases (e.g., special characters) are not covered, the core behavioral trait is clearly communicated.

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?

Three sentences, each with a distinct purpose: (1) what the tool does, (2) prerequisite read guard, (3) follow-up actions. No unnecessary words.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple type tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential workflow and purpose. It lacks details on character limits or error behavior, but is largely complete for its scope.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, with both parameters described in the schema. The description adds no extra detail beyond schema examples, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Type text into a tmux pane WITHOUT pressing Enter.' It specifies the verb (type) and resource (tmux pane), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like tmux_keys by emphasizing the lack of Enter key press.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides an explicit workflow: read first, then type, then read again, then use tmux_keys to press Enter. It also implies when not to use (if you want to press Enter, use tmux_keys).

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