Kill a session

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the session is 'Terminate[d]' and advises care, but it does not disclose permanence, effects on child windows/panes, or the required confirmation step (which exists as the 'confirm' parameter in the schema). The warning is generic and lacks specific consequences.

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 two short sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose, the second adds a caution. This is ideal conciseness for a simple tool.

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?

Despite full schema coverage, the description omits critical context for a destructive operation: it does not mention that the action is irreversible, will terminate all windows/panes within the session, or that the tool expects confirm=true to proceed. It relies on the title, name, and schema to carry meaning that should be in the description.

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 fully describes all three parameters (target, host, confirm) with 100% coverage, so the description adds no additional parameter-level meaning. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already holds the semantic load.

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 uses the specific verb 'Terminate' with the resource 'tmux session', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like tmux_kill_window and tmux_kill_pane. This is a precise, non-tautological statement of purpose.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool vs alternatives. 'Use with care' is a caution about handling, not a selection criterion, and there is no mention of when a session should be killed or that sibling tools like tmux_kill_pane/window are more appropriate for finer-grained operations.

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