Advanced File Operations

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

The description does not add behavioral context beyond the annotations. Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description fails to mention that operations may modify or delete files, require SSH credentials, or have side effects. With annotations present, the description should still provide safety or prerequisite details.

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 extremely short (one sentence), but it fails to convey essential information. Conciseness should not come at the cost of usefulness. Every sentence should add value; this sentence is generic and does not help the agent select or invoke the tool effectively.

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 (25 parameters, 5 actions, output schema exists), the description is severely incomplete. It does not mention the supported actions, prerequisites (SSH credentials), or how to combine parameters. An output schema exists but is not referenced. The description leaves the agent with no guidance on how to operate 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?

Although schema coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions, the tool's description does not summarize which parameters correspond to which action. With 25 parameters and multiple actions, the description should group parameters or list actions, but it just repeats the title. Baseline for high coverage is 3, but the lack of structural guidance reduces clarity.

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 states 'Advanced file operations on remote hosts', which indicates the tool's domain (files on remote hosts) and implies operations, but lacks a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes from sibling tools like tm_hosts or tm_inventory, so a clear domain is established.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not specify contexts like 'for file management, use this; for host management, use tm_hosts'. An agent must infer from the name and schema alone, which is insufficient.

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