tmux_pipe_pane

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 explains that output feeds to stdin, the toggle effect of only_new, and the return value. However, it does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., resource usage) or details on how multiple pipes interact.

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 relatively concise with two paragraphs, includes an example command, and uses clear language. It front-loads the purpose and adds detail without excessive verbosity, earning its sentences.

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 the tool's complexity (piping output), 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description provides adequate coverage of core behavior and return but lacks details on parameter formats (e.g., target_pane identifier), default values, and exact meaning of the boolean return.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'command' with an example and 'only_new' behavior, but does not describe 'target_pane' (required) or 'target' at all, leaving half of the parameters undocumented.

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 pipes pane output to a shell command and highlights it is great for logging. It uses a specific verb 'pipe' and resource 'pane's output', but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like tmux_capture_pane or tmux_stream_*, leaving some ambiguity.

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 explains how to stop piping (no command) and toggle behavior (only_new), but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like tmux_capture_pane for one-time capture or tmux_stream_* for streaming. Usage context is implied but lacks explicit exclusions.

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