ssh_file_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states it gets file info but does not mention side effects, authentication needs, error handling (e.g., file not found), or any limitations. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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 concise (3 lines) and front-loaded with the main purpose. The Args section is slightly redundant but still efficient. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 complexity (simple read tool) and presence of an output schema (not shown), the description adequately states it returns detailed info. However, it lacks details on return format, error conditions, or permissions required. For a tool with many siblings, more completeness would be beneficial.

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 input schema has no descriptions for parameters (0% coverage). The description adds minimal clarification: 'path' is 'Path to the file', 'session_name' is 'SSH session to use'. This provides some context beyond the schema titles but does not explain formats, constraints, or default behavior.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'detailed information about a file', listing specific attributes (size, type, permissions, owner, timestamps). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ssh_file_permissions (focused only on permissions) and ssh_list_directory (lists directory contents).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. It does not mention alternatives or when not to use it. For a tool with many siblings (e.g., ssh_file_permissions, ssh_find_files), explicit usage context is missing.

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