term_resize

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states 'Resize the PTY,' revealing nothing about side effects (e.g., changing terminal dimensions, possible disruption of output), permissions, or reversibility. For a mutation tool with no annotation safety signals, this is a critical gap.

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 sentence with zero structural organization. While it is short, this is under-specification rather than conciseness—vital information about the session and effect is omitted. It is not front-loaded with key constraints or usage context.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (3 required params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is grossly incomplete. It omits the session dependency, the meaning of cols/rows, and any behavioral side effects. An agent cannot reliably invoke this tool correctly based solely on the definition.

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 input schema covers only session_id with a description, leaving cols and rows undocumented. The description 'Resize the PTY.' adds no meaning about what cols and rows represent or how they relate to the session. With schema coverage at 33% (below 50%), the description should compensate but fails entirely to explain parameter semantics.

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 'Resize the PTY.' identifies a specific verb and resource, but it is extremely terse. It does not mention that this applies to an existing terminal session, nor does it distinguish from siblings like term_open or term_send. The verb is clear but the context is minimal, so an agent could guess the purpose but lacks precision.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites (e.g., a session from term_open), no exclusions, and no reference to sibling tools. The implication that it is for resizing an existing PTY is implicit at best, but the description leaves the agent without actionable context.

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