Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
tmux-mcp

tmux-mcp

by vn-lazyming
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

List terminal panes

tmux_list_panes
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists every tmux session, window and pane with its target, pane ID, command, cwd and flags, so you can pick the right ID to read from or send keys to.

Instructions

List every tmux session, window and pane as target pane_id command cwd [flags]. Pass either id to tmux_send/tmux_read to work in the human's own pane. [opened by agent: KIND NAME] marks what tmux_new opened; tmux_kill(NAME) closes it.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "tmux_list_panes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine beyond-schema context: the exact output line layout, what the [flags] and [opened by agent: KIND NAME] annotations mean, and how those names map to tmux_kill.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three dense sentences lead with the output format, then downstream routing, then flag semantics. No filler; every sentence carries operational meaning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only listing tool with annotations covering safety and an output schema present, the description supplies everything an agent needs: what is listed, the line format, the meaning of flags, and how IDs are reused. Nothing material is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With zero parameters, the baseline is 4. The description adds value by explaining the returned 'target' and 'pane_id' tokens that feed the other tools, but there are no parameters to document.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb ('List') over a precise resource ('every tmux session, window and pane') and even spells out the output line format, so an agent knows exactly what it gets. It is clearly the discovery/read-side tool distinct from the mutating siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description routes the agent downstream ('Pass either id to tmux_send/tmux_read') and explains the 'opened by agent' flag and that tmux_kill(NAME) closes such panes, which gives clear context for use. It stops short of an explicit 'call this first to discover panes, not for sending input' statement, hence 4 not 5.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools