tmux_break_pane

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the return value and the effect of 'select', but it does not explicitly state that the pane is moved (destructive) or other side effects. The term 'break out' implies removal from the original window, but this is not confirmed.

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 concise: two sentences and a brief code block for parameter notes. It is front-loaded with the primary action. Some redundancy could be trimmed (e.g., the code block could be integrated into sentences), but overall it is well-structured.

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 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description covers the action, return type, and two parameters. However, it misses explanations for the required 'target_pane' and optional 'target' parameters, and lacks detail on destructive behavior. It is adequate but has clear gaps.

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 description explains two parameters ('window_name' and 'select') and their effects, but 'target_pane' (required) and 'target' are not described beyond their names. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description adds some value but leaves gaps for half the parameters.

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's action: 'Break a pane out into a new window of its own.' This is a specific verb+resource combination. It is distinguishable from siblings like tmux_split_window or tmux_join_pane, though it does not explicitly contrast with them.

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 provides usage details for the 'window_name' and 'select' parameters (e.g., naming the new window, using -d for background creation). However, it lacks guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives like tmux_split_window or tmux_join_pane, and no prerequisites are mentioned.

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