ssh_change_owner

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

No annotations provided, and description does not disclose behavioral traits such as required permissions (e.g., ownership change may need root), destructive nature, or side effects. Only a terse summary.

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?

Description is concise (one line plus list of args) and front-loaded with purpose. However, the list of args is redundant with the input schema and could be omitted or expanded with useful details.

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 5-parameter tool with no annotations and an output schema (not shown), the description is incomplete. It does not cover prerequisites, error conditions, return values, or behavior of optional parameters like group and recursive.

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%, yet description merely lists parameter names without adding meaning. For example, 'owner' and 'group' are not explained, and 'recursive' is just named. Does not compensate for lack of schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states 'Change file ownership (chown)', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like ssh_file_permissions (which changes permissions). However, it lacks additional context about scope or edge cases.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., when to use ssh_file_permissions instead). No mention of prerequisites or when not to use.

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