tmux_unlink_window

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the failure condition (window only linked once unless not last) and the constraint that tmux refuses to leave a window with no links. This provides sufficient behavioral insight.

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 plus a parenthetical clarification. The main action is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

While the purpose and behavior are well-explained, the lack of parameter explanations leaves the tool incomplete. The agent cannot determine how to specify the window or optional target without additional knowledge. This gap reduces overall 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 schema coverage is 0%, meaning the description must explain parameter meanings. It fails to describe either 'window' or 'target', leaving their semantics unclear. For example, it doesn't specify what format the window identifier should take or what the target parameter does.

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 action: 'Unlink a window (remove one of its links).' It also distinguishes from the sibling tool tmux_kill_window by noting that unlinking fails if the window has only one link and suggests using kill_window to destroy it outright.

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 explicit guidance on when not to use this tool (when the window is only linked once) and suggests an alternative (tmux_kill_window). The note about 'refuses to leave a window with no links' clarifies the behavior.

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