ssh_tool

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions persistent sessions and the set of operations, but does not disclose side effects of commands, output format, or authentication/security implications beyond listing credential parameters.

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?

A single, information-dense sentence that front-loads the tool's identity and lists operations without 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?

Given the tool's complexity (6 operations, persistent sessions, 11 parameters, no output schema), the description is too sparse. It omits return values, session lifecycle, error behavior, and prerequisites for each operation, leaving substantial gaps for the agent.

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 coverage is low (18%), so the description compensates by mapping operations to parameter sets: connect uses host/username/password or privateKeyPath, exec uses command, upload/download use local/remote paths, list uses remotePath. This clarifies parameter usage beyond the bare schema, but lacks detail on optional parameters like passphrase and port.

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?

Clearly states it is an SSH client with persistent sessions and enumerates six operations (connect, exec, upload/download, list, disconnect), making it distinct from other tools like efs_exec or process_tool.

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?

Implies usage via operation list (e.g., exec for remote commands, upload/download for SFTP), but provides no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance. Does mention sessionId requirement, hinting at session-based workflow.

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