jms_switch_terminal_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the authentication methods and the privacy concern about password retention, but does not describe side effects (e.g., whether the current user session is affected) or return behavior. The warning is valuable but incomplete.

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?

Three efficient sentences that front-load purpose, then provide critical usage details. Every sentence adds value with no 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?

Despite a large sibling list providing context, the description lacks details about the output schema (known to exist but unmentioned), does not describe all parameters, and omits behavioral aspects like session state changes. The overall coverage is inadequate for a complex tool.

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 0%. The description explains the 'method' and 'password' parameters implicitly, but does not mention 'total_timeout_seconds' or 'settle_timeout_seconds' at all. For 6 parameters, this is insufficient compensation.

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 ('Switch to a verified remote user') and the context ('within the existing JumpServer shell'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like jms_exit_terminal_user and jms_run_terminal_command by focusing on user switching.

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 explains when to use 'sudo' vs 'su' and when to supply a password. It also warns about password retention in trace history. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives beyond the methods.

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