List tabs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety and repeatability profile is covered structurally. The description contributes only the domain model of what a tab is, adding no extra behavioral context such as result size, ordering, or scoping behavior beyond what the schema already states.

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 short sentences, the action front-loaded, and the second sentence earning its place by defining the resource. No 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?

For a simple, fully annotated, single-parameter read tool, the description plus schema covers what an agent needs to invoke it. The main residual gap is that no output schema exists and the description says nothing about the shape or size of the returned tab list.

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?

Only one parameter, and the schema documents it at 100% coverage including the 'omit to list tabs in all workspaces' behavior. The description adds nothing about parameters, so the schema does all the work — the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List tabs') and then defines the resource itself, distinguishing a tab from a workspace or pane. It does not name any sibling tool (e.g. herdr_pane_list) explicitly, but the hierarchy explanation gives an agent enough to tell what this enumerates.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no reference to alternatives such as herdr_pane_list. The hierarchy note ('tabs are layouts inside a workspace; each contains one or more panes') only implicitly signals that this is the middle layer of the workspace/tab/pane model.

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