ssh_list_keys

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'List available SSH keys' without explaining what 'available' means, which directory is scanned (beyond the schema default), or whether it returns file paths or key details. This is insufficient for a tool with no other metadata.

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 a single, clear, and efficient sentence. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, containing no wasted words. Slightly more detail could be added without harming conciseness, but the current form is acceptable.

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 tool is simple, but with no output schema and no annotations, the description should mention what the output looks like or what 'available' means (e.g., private keys in the directory). The lack of any such context leaves the tool under-specified, especially given the diversity of sibling tools.

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 fully documents the 'directory' parameter with a description and default. The description adds no additional semantic information. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('available SSH keys'), which distinguishes it from siblings like ssh_keygen or ssh_fingerprint. However, it lacks explicit mention of the directory scope, which is only available in the parameter schema, and does not explicitly contrast with 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ssh_fingerprint or ssh_keygen. The description is purely the action and resource, leaving the user to infer usage from the tool name.

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