ssh_ls

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the protocol (SFTP) but fails to mention authentication requirements, potential errors (e.g., directory not found, permission denied), or whether the output is a flat list or includes metadata. This is insufficient for a tool that interacts with remote systems.

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, well-formed sentence that conveys the core functionality without extraneous words. It is front-loaded and immediately understandable, making it easy for an AI agent to parse.

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 relatively simple, but the description omits important context: no output schema is provided, so the agent does not know the format of the listing (e.g., just names or with details). Also, no information about error handling or edge cases (e.g., nonexistent path) is given. This leaves the agent underinformed for invocation.

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?

All 6 parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the schema already provides meaning. The description adds no further detail beyond what is in the schema, such as the fact that 'password' is discouraged. The baseline of 3 is appropriate as the description does not compensate for any missing information.

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 'List files in a directory on a remote host via SFTP' is a specific verb+resource combination. It clearly states the action (list files), the target (a directory on a remote host), and the protocol (SFTP). This distinguishes it from siblings like ssh_read_file or ssh_exec.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools (e.g., ssh_stat, ssh_find). There is no mention of prerequisites, authentication methods, or when not to use it. This omission reduces its usefulness for an AI agent deciding among alternatives.

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