ssh_head_file

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

No annotations provided, and the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic operation. It does not disclose how the tool handles large files, binary content, or error cases, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 structured as a brief docstring with an Args section. It is concise (few lines) and front-loaded with the core purpose, though the 'Args:' formatting could be omitted for brevity.

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 simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the basic functionality. However, it omits details about error handling, file permissions, and interaction with the SSH session, which are relevant for a production environment.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description explains each parameter: path is 'Path to the file', lines is 'Number of lines from the beginning', session_name is 'SSH session to use'. This adds meaning beyond the schema's titles and defaults, but lacks detail on constraints like file encoding or line counting 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?

Description states 'Get the first N lines of a file' with clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like ssh_read_file (full file) and ssh_tail_file (last N lines), making its purpose explicit.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ssh_read_file or ssh_tail_file. The description only implies usage for beginning-of-file access but lacks context or exclusions.

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