ssh-session-mcp

ssh-command-status

Retrieve output of a long-running SSH command by its ID, showing completed results or partial progress.

Instructions

Check the status of a long-running async command. Returns current output if completed, or partial output if still running.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "commandId": "<commandId>"
    },
    "name": "ssh-command-status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`maxChars`	No	Max chars to read from output (default 16000)
`commandId`	Yes	The async command ID returned by ssh-run

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.8.0Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behavioral traits: returns current/partial output, handles both completed and running states. However, it omits edge cases like invalid commandId or repeated checks.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence efficiently states purpose and key behavior, no redundancy, front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple status-check tool, the description covers purpose and return behavior, but lacks explicit mention of prerequisite (commandId from ssh-run) and error handling.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema covers 100% of parameters, description adds minimal extra meaning beyond schema (e.g., clarifies commandId is from ssh-run, but that's implied). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it checks the status of an async command, specifies return behavior (completed vs partial output), and distinguishes from siblings like ssh-run which starts commands.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage after an async command (via commandId) but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives, nor provide exclusions. Only implicit context.

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