ssh_ls

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

The description mentions SFTP but omits critical behavioral details such as authentication requirements (keys vs password), whether it lists only filenames or detailed info, or error handling. With no annotations, the description fails to adequately disclose these traits.

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?

A single, clear sentence with no redundant information. It is appropriately front-loaded and 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?

Given the absence of annotations and output schema, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain return format, authentication prerequisites, or behavior in edge cases, leaving significant gaps for a remote file listing tool.

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 100%, so the description adds no extra meaning beyond what is already in the schema. It meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding of parameters (e.g., that path must be absolute).

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 'List files in a directory on a remote host via SFTP,' specifying the verb, resource, and protocol. This differentiates it from siblings like ssh_read_file (reads file content) or ssh_find (searches for files).

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 implies usage for listing remote directory contents but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Alternatives like ssh_find are available but not mentioned, leaving the agent to infer context.

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