pty-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: the session remains running remotely after detachment, and reattachment is possible via another tool. However, it lacks details on permissions, side effects, error conditions, or what 'detach' means operationally beyond keeping the PTY alive.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and includes essential context without waste. Every part earns its place by clarifying the tool's behavior and usage.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description is moderately complete for a simple tool with one parameter. It covers the basic purpose and reattachment process but lacks details on errors, return values, or deeper operational context that would be helpful for an agent.

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 mentions session_id in the reattachment context, implying its purpose, but doesn't explain what a session_id is, its format, or how to obtain it. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the bare parameter name in the schema.

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 specific action ('Detach from a persistent session') and resource ('session'), distinguishing it from siblings like close_session (which likely terminates) and list_remote_sessions (which lists). It precisely defines the verb+resource combination.

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 clear context for when to use this tool ('Detach... but keep the remote PTY running') and mentions reattachment via list_remote_sessions + session_id, implying an alternative workflow. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it versus close_session or other session management tools.

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