Restore a window layout

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'apply' which implies mutation, but does not disclose whether it overwrites the current layout, what happens if the target doesn't exist, or any other side effects. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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, 9 words, front-loaded with the verb 'Apply'. It is concise with no wasted words or redundant information.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description should provide more context about behavior, prerequisites, and return value. It only states the action, leaving the agent without guidance on side effects or success/failure conditions. This is inadequate for a mutation tool.

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 100%, with useful details like 'Layout string obtained from tmux_capture_layout' and 'Window target (e.g., session:window or window id)'. The description adds only the phrase 'saved layout string', which largely repeats the schema. The baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Apply a saved layout string to a target window' uses a specific verb (apply) and identifies the resource (layout string, target window). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like tmux_capture_layout (capture) and tmux_apply_layout_profile (profile-based).

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 usage: you have a layout string from tmux_capture_layout and want to apply it to a window. It does not explicitly state when to use this over tmux_apply_layout_profile or mention any exclusions or alternatives.

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