Resize Terminal

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that resizing sends a SIGWINCH signal to the TUI app, which is useful behavioral context beyond basic functionality. However, it lacks details on permissions, error conditions (e.g., invalid sessionId), or side effects, leaving 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 extremely concise—two sentences that directly state the action and a key behavioral effect. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 moderate complexity (mutation with 3 params) and no annotations or output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the core action and a signal effect but misses details like return values, error handling, or dependencies on other tools (e.g., 'list_sessions'). It relies on the schema for param docs.

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%, so the schema fully documents parameters (sessionId, cols, rows). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, such as unit explanations or constraints. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 ('Resize') and the target ('terminal dimensions of a session'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'cursor' or 'send_keys' by focusing on terminal resizing. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from potential similar tools (none present in siblings), keeping it at 4 rather than 5.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an active session), exclusions, or related tools like 'launch' for starting sessions. Without such context, users must infer usage from the purpose alone.

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