tmux_next_layout

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return type {"window": window} and basic action but lacks details on layout wrapping, side effects, or prerequisites like window existence. Adequate but incomplete.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, no redundancy. Every sentence adds value: purpose and parameter behavior. Perfect conciseness.

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 tool with two params and no output schema, the description covers the return value and window parameter but misses the target parameter and layout cycling behavior. Adequate but missing one param explanation offsets completeness.

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 the 'window' parameter (as -t flag) but completely ignores the 'target' parameter. Schema description coverage is 0%, so compensation is needed but only partial. Two params exist, only one explained.

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 rotates a window to its next preset layout, using the verb 'rotate' and specifying the resource 'window'. It distinguishes from sibling tmux_select_layout by implying cycling through layouts as opposed to selecting a specific one.

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 indicates when to use -t parameter but does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over tmux_select_layout or other layout tools. No exclusions or alternatives are provided, though context of 'next layout' implies sequencing.

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