terminal_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It mentions an 'explicit heuristic reason' as an output trait, but it does not state whether the tool reads only, what side effects it may have, what the classification categories are, or how it handles disallowed sessions.

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 compact sentence with no redundant filler. It front-loads the action and resource, though some terms like 'allowed' and 'explicit heuristic reason' could be clearer.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description must fully explain the operation and its result. It gives only a high-level notion of classification, leaving out the return format, possible classification values, and input requirements. An agent could infer intent but would struggle to call it correctly and interpret the result.

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 needs to compensate. It identifies the parameter as a tmux session, but it does not clarify whether the session value should be a name, an ID, a path, or an index, nor does it explain the 'allowed' constraint.

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 does state a verb ('classify') and a resource ('an allowed tmux session'), so the basic purpose is present. However, 'allowed' is undefined, 'classify' is vague about what dimensions are being classified, and the description does not distinguish terminal_status from its sibling terminal_status_bound.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as terminal_status_bound or terminal_list_sessions. The phrase 'an allowed tmux session' implies some restriction, but it does not explain what makes a session allowed or how this relates to sibling tools.

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