session_kill

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait: it kills every agent in the session, not just the session itself. It also mentions the kill can be disabled via TMUX_AGENTS_ALLOW_KILL=false. With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden, and it does a decent job but doesn't mention reversibility, permissions, or what happens to running processes.

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, no fluff. The core action is front-loaded, and the conditional disablement is a useful second sentence. Every word 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?

For a destructive tool with one required parameter and no annotations, the description is minimal but covers the main action and a key safety condition. However, it lacks details about the session parameter format, what happens to the tmux session itself, and whether the operation is reversible. The output schema exists but doesn't compensate for these gaps.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented 'session' parameter. The description says 'a session' but doesn't clarify what format the session parameter takes (name? ID?), whether it's a tmux session name, or how to find valid values. This is a gap for a required parameter.

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 states a specific verb ('Kill') and resource ('a session and every agent in it'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like pane_kill (kills a pane) and agents_launch (launches agents). It doesn't explicitly name a sibling, but the scope is clear enough.

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 implies when to use it: when you want to kill a session and all its agents, versus pane_kill for a single pane. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. The TMUX_AGENTS_ALLOW_KILL=false note gives a conditional context but not a full usage guide.

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