ssh_tail

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure; it usefully discloses that the operation is non-blocking and returns UTF-8-safe lines. However, it does not state whether an ssh_connect session is required, whether any connection state changes, or what happens on connection failure.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose, and uses a clear Args block for parameters. The behavior sentence earns its place by adding non-blocking and UTF-8 boundary details without unnecessary exposition.

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 simple retrieval tool this is mostly sufficient: purpose, behavior, and both parameters are covered, and an output schema exists to document return values. Still, the description omits connection prerequisites and the source/path of the log file, which matter when siblings include ssh_connect and ssh_exec.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description fully compensates by explaining both parameters: board_id as an identifier with an example, and lines as the count of recent lines with its default. This is additional meaning beyond the bare schema types and default.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and identifies the resource ('most recent log lines from the remote log file via SSH ring buffer'), so the agent knows exactly what the tool returns. It also contrasts implicitly with serial-focused siblings like serial_tail and with ssh_exec, which is for executing commands rather than tailing a log.

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 phrase 'via SSH ring buffer' and 'remote log file' imply this is the tool for non-blocking SSH log tailing, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer it over serial_tail or ssh_exec, nor does it mention prerequisites such as an established SSH connection.

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