ssh_enum_privesc

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 exact checks performed, the input parameters, and return behavior (structured findings or error on SSH failure). It doesn't mention side effects (e.g., whether it modifies remote state), but the enumeration context implies read-only operations. This is meaningful behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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 compact yet complete. It front-loads the purpose, then details the checks, lists parameters, and states the return behavior. No unnecessary words or 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?

The description covers the essential aspects: what it does, which checks it runs, all parameters, and return format. It lacks some context like prerequisites (e.g., valid SSH credentials, permissions) and timeouts, but given the moderate complexity and absence of an output schema, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 no descriptions (0% coverage), but the description explicitly explains each parameter: host, username, password, key_file, and port. This fully compensates for the schema gap, providing clear meaning for all five parameters.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Enumerate') and resource ('privilege escalation vectors on a Linux host via SSH'). It lists concrete check categories, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like ssh_exec (which runs arbitrary commands) and nmap scans.

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 usage is implied by the description: you need SSH credentials to a Linux host. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., ssh_exec for command execution, or local enumeration) or provide exclusions. No sibling alternative is named.

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