Get Ssh Session

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds that the target must be a running container and that the payload is a credential, but says nothing about credential sensitivity, lifetime/expiry, or whether repeated calls rotate the secret.

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 tight sentence with the purpose front-loaded and no filler; the sibling reference is appended efficiently. It is close to optimal length for the amount of information conveyed, though the information conveyed is thin.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should say something about the returned credential, and it only says 'the SSH credential'. Combined with five undocumented parameters, the definition leaves real gaps, but the annotations cover the read-only/open-world profile and the sibling reference gives the agent enough to select the 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 description coverage is 0% across five parameters, so the description carries the full burden and largely fails: it never mentions workspaceSlug, appSlug, component, env, or region, nor what the production/preview/development enum selects. Only the loose phrase 'for a running container' hints that the required identifiers locate a container, leaving env and region semantics entirely unexplained.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — retrieve the SSH credential for a running container — and explicitly frames it as the GET counterpart of createSshSession, so the agent can distinguish it from that sibling. It stops short of 5 because 'SSH credential' is not clarified (key, password, or connection string) and the container is only identified indirectly.

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?

Naming createSshSession implies the split (create a session vs. fetch an existing one's credential), and 'for a running container' hints at the prerequisite that a container must exist. However, no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement is given, and the agent must infer that createSshSession must be called first.

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