ssh_download_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool retrieves text content, implying text-only capability, but does not specify behavior on errors (e.g., missing file, permission issues) or whether it handles binary files. The side effects are none, but that is not explicitly stated.

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 structured with a summary line, then a more detailed paragraph, followed by Args and Returns sections. It is relatively concise at about 70 words, though the summary and first sentence are slightly redundant.

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 simple tool with one parameter, the description covers the core functionality and parameter meaning. It lacks details on error handling and prerequisites, but given the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description is adequately complete for most use cases.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds meaning by explaining that remote_path is 'Path to the file on the remote host.' This clarifies the single parameter beyond the schema's type and title.

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 clearly states the action ('Download and read a file') and the resource ('remote host via SFTP'). It distinguishes well from sibling tools like ssh_upload_file and ssh_exec, which have different purposes.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., active SSH connection) or limitations (e.g., text-only files). It assumes a connected remote server but does not direct the agent to ensure connectivity first.

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