remote_pane_broadcast

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only states the action and purpose, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether it blocks, returns output, requires an active session, or affects all panes across sessions. This is a significant gap for a mutating broadcast command.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action ('Broadcast a command to all panes'), and every word earns its place without filler or 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?

The description adequately captures the essential purpose and use case for a simple broadcast tool, but lacks behavioral context such as return behavior and prerequisites. No output schema is present to fill that gap, so it's acceptable but not comprehensive.

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 input schema already fully describes both parameters (command and sessionId) with clear descriptions, so the tool description doesn't need to add more. It doesn't add extra meaning beyond the schema, matching the baseline for 100% 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 uses a specific verb ('Broadcast') and resource ('all panes in a session'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like remote_pane_exec (targets a single pane) and shell (targets a session). The second sentence reinforces the multi-context use case.

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?

It explicitly states when to use: 'running the same command in multiple contexts simultaneously'. This provides clear context, though it does not mention alternatives or when not to use, so it stops short of a 5.

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