terminal_list_sessions

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It discloses important behavioral constraints: only whitelisted sessions are returned and denied session details are hidden, which is non-obvious and safety-relevant. It doesn't mention output format or error behavior, but for a read-only list tool this is adequate.

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 sentence with no filler; the key behavioral scope is front-loaded. Every word contributes meaning, making it exceptionally efficient.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only list operation the description is mostly complete: it defines the result set (whitelisted sessions) and a privacy guarantee. Lacking an output schema, it doesn't describe the per-session fields returned, which is a minor gap, but not enough to penalize heavily.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, and the schema's 100% coverage makes further elaboration unnecessary. Baseline for zero-param tools is 4; description doesn't need to add anything.

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 specific verb ('List') and resource ('whitelisted tmux sessions'), and adds a scope limiter ('without exposing denied session details'). This distinguishes it from generic listing tools and sibling tools like terminal_status or terminal_capture.

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 description implies its use for enumerating sessions but gives no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives. With siblings like terminal_status or terminal_list_bindings, an agent could benefit from a hint about when to prefer this tool, but the purpose is clear enough to infer.

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