Retrieve all SSH keys configured on the cPanel account, providing a clear inventory for management and security auditing.
List all SSH keys on the account
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": "list_ssh_keys"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose return format, whether keys include private/public details, pagination, or any other behavioral nuances. It adds minimal value beyond the tool's name.
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, concise sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word adds value.
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 zero-parameter list operation, the description is mostly sufficient. It clearly states the scope ('all SSH keys on the account') and implies a list result. However, without an output schema, it would benefit from a note on what fields the list contains (e.g., key names, fingerprints). Slight gap, but overall adequate.
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 input schema is empty (0 parameters), and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific info because there are no parameters to elaborate on.
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 'List all SSH keys on the account' uses a specific verb ('List') and clearly identifies the resource (SSH keys). It distinguishes this tool from sibling 'list_ssl_keys' and other SSH-related operations like import/delete/authorize.
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 usage: use this when you want to view all SSH keys. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, leaving the guidance at an implied level rather than providing explicit exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.