kitty_ls

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

With no annotations, description discloses caching behavior (3 seconds) and return format (JSON tree with specific fields). Does not cover permissions or rate limits, but for a read-only listing, this is sufficient.

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?

Two concise sentences; first sentence states purpose, second adds filtering and caching. Front-loaded with no wasted words.

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?

Explains return hierarchy and fields, includes caching detail. No output schema, so description compensates. Could mention snapshot nature but still fairly complete for a listing tool.

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 covers all parameters (100% coverage). Description adds context by noting filtering flags and cache, but does not provide significant additional meaning beyond schema descriptions.

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?

Clearly states the tool lists kitty OS windows, tabs, and windows as a JSON tree, specifying the resource hierarchy and action. Distinguishes from sibling tools as the primary listing command.

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?

Mentions filtering via --match and --match-tab but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. Lacks guidance on context-specific use cases.

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