jms_acquire_sftp_session

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It hints at 'reuse' and 'managed' but does not explain session lifecycle, side effects, authentication needs, or what happens if no session exists. This is minimal for a session-acquisition tool.

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 redundant phrases. It efficiently communicates the core action and resource, earning its place without wasted words.

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 session management tool with no annotations and sparse parameters, the description is too terse. It does not address session reuse conditions, required inputs, or output behavior, although an output schema exists. The absence of context makes it incomplete for safe and correct usage.

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 has 0% description coverage and two parameters. The phrase 'Resolve a target' gives a hint about asset_ref, but account_ref is not mentioned at all. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions, leaving parameter meanings ambiguous.

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 uses a specific verb ('Resolve', 'get or reuse') and identifies a clear resource ('managed KoKo SFTP session'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like jms_acquire_terminal_session. It clearly indicates this is for SFTP session acquisition rather than other operations.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage for obtaining an SFTP session but does not mention related tools (e.g., jms_acquire_terminal_session) or any exclusions or prerequisites.

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