kitty_set_tab_color

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

The description discloses that colors can be names, hex values, or 'none' to revert to default, adding useful behavioral info. However, it does not mention persistence, error behavior (e.g., invalid color), or any side effects. With no annotations, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 covering purpose, color formats, and special value 'none'. No filler, front-loaded with the action. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 output schema and no annotations, the description is fairly complete for a simple color-setting tool. It explains input format and the special 'none' behavior. It could mention error scenarios or that the 'colors' object requires at least one key, but those are covered in the schema. Missing notes about 'self' and 'match' parameters, but they are documented in the schema.

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 coverage is 100% and well-documented. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that 'none' reverts to default and that color values can be names or hex. This enriches the parameter understanding.

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 tool's action: changing foreground/background colors of a tab in the tab bar. It uses a specific verb ('Change') and resource ('colors of a tab'), effectively distinguishing it from siblings like 'kitty_set_colors' and 'kitty_set_background_opacity'.

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 does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It implies usage for modifying tab bar colors but does not mention alternatives or prerequisites. The context is clear but lacks exclusion criteria.

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