iterm2_side_pane

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the directional fallback behavior (left if current is rightmost) which is useful. However, it doesn't describe what 'current pane' means precisely, whether it returns an identifier or a pane object, or any failure behavior (e.g., what happens with no side pane).

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 sentences, zero wasted words. States the action, the return semantics, and the use case all in compact form. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

No output schema exists and no annotations are given, so the description must cover behavior fully. It explains the directional logic and use case, but lacks detail about the return value format, how it identifies the pane, and interactions with tools like iterm2_send_text or iterm2_split_pane. Adequate but with notable gaps given the zero annotation coverage.

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 tool takes 0 parameters with 100% schema coverage (empty schema is fully documented). Since there are no parameters to explain, the description has no burden here. Baseline 4 for zero-parameter tools is appropriate.

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?

Clear specific verb+resource (Get the side pane) with explicit directional behavior stated. Distinguishes from siblings like iterm2_current_pane and iterm2_list_panes by specifying adjacency logic (right side, or left if rightmost).

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?

States usefulness for 'interacting with an adjacent terminal pane' which implies when to use it, but doesn't explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., iterm2_list_panes for a broader view, iterm2_read_pane for content). No when-not-to-use guidance given.

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