session_start

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

With no annotations, the description should detail behavioral traits. It only mentions persistence but fails to disclose side effects, required permissions, error conditions, or what happens to existing sessions. The term '持久' (persistent) suggests it remains after command exits, but no further transparency.

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 a single sentence, which is concise. However, it lacks structure and is too minimal for a tool with 3 parameters; it does not earn its place as it omits critical information.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not specify return values, parameter formats, or behavioral context like session uniqueness, making it inadequate for an AI agent to use correctly.

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%, and the description does not explain any of the three parameters (cwd, command, sessionId). The agent must infer meaning from names alone, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 '启动一个持久 tmux 会话' clearly states the action (start) and the resource (persistent tmux session). Although it does not explicitly distinguish from siblings, the verb 'start' is distinct from 'read', 'exec', 'stop', making it 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like session_exec or session_stop. No prerequisites or context for usage are provided.

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