terminal_resize

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the resize action but does not disclose what happens if only 'name' is provided (width/height are optional per schema), whether the resize persists, how it affects pane contents, or failure behavior. For a mutating tool this is a noticeable gap.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and adds a brief rationale. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff, repetition, or boilerplate.

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?

With three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is adequate for basic invocation but leaves ambiguity about optional-parameter behavior (e.g., resizing with only 'name') and the lack of a return value. It is functional but not thorough.

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 already documents the 'name', 'width', and 'height' parameters. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond that, which meets the baseline of 3 but does not exceed it.

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 uses a specific verb ('Resize') with a clear resource ('a terminal pane'), immediately distinguishing it from siblings like terminal_close, terminal_list, terminal_send, terminal_read, terminal_snapshot, and terminal_wait. The parenthetical adds practical context without obscuring the core action.

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 gives a concrete usage context: 'useful before reading output from width-sensitive programs'. This implies when to use it, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives. Clear context with no exclusions earns a 4.

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