list_ssh_keys

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that SSH keys are per-server (legacy VPS), which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention safety aspects (read-only), authentication needs, or rate limits. For a simple read tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The action is front-loaded and every phrase adds value. Perfectly concise.

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 fully explains what the tool does and how to use it. It does not describe the output format, but for a simple list operation without an output schema, this is acceptable. The context of per-server versus account-wide keys is provided.

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 100% coverage, with the single parameter service_id described as 'Server ID from list_services'. The tool description reiterates this, adding no new meaning. Baseline 3 applies as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'List' and the resource 'SSH keys on a specific server (legacy VPS)', and distinguishes it from account-wide SSH keys by noting they are per-server. This helps differentiate from the sibling tool list_account_ssh_keys.

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 explicitly instructs to 'Pass a service_id from list_services', which provides a clear usage pattern. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it, but the distinction from account-wide keys is implied. Sibling tools include list_account_ssh_keys, but no direct comparison is made.

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