Set audit logging

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core effect (logs commands and outputs) and that it toggles, implying reversibility. However, it does not mention side effects such as persistence, performance impact, or required permissions, leaving some gaps 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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and purpose. Every word earns its place without repetition or fluff.

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 simple toggle with three parameters and no output schema, the description and schema together provide adequate context. It explains the action, scope, and what logging means. Minor improvement could be made by noting that the setting is per host/session, but the description already mentions this, making it largely complete.

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%, as all three parameters have clear descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so 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 clearly states the tool enables or disables verbose audit logging for a host/session, and explains what that entails ('logs commands and outputs'). This specific verb+resource+scope distinguishes it from the many sibling tmux tools.

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 when one needs to toggle audit logging, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions. Given similar setters like tmux_set_default and tmux_set_sync_panes exist as siblings, more guidance would help.

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