remote_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context: it returns a map (no mutation), never returns secrets, and provides CLI command for configuration, which is beyond annotation data.

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. Front-loaded purpose, then critical non-obvious fact about secrets. Highly efficient.

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?

With no output schema, the description gives a good sense of return content (map of various remote entities). Given annotations cover safety and schema covers parameters, only minor omission is explicit mention of filtering options implied by repo parameter.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond schema descriptions for 'repo' and 'format'. It hints at the output nature (map of entities) but does not refine parameter usage.

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 'Read-only map of configured SSH hosts, DB connections, log sources, and command aliases for this project.' This provides a specific verb ('list' implied by map) and resource (configured remote entities), distinguishing it from sibling tools.

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?

Implies usage for viewing remote configurations and notes that secrets are managed elsewhere, but does not explicitly contrast with similar siblings like db_query or remote_exec or provide criteria for when to use this tool.

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