Diagnose MCP/SSH state

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it returns local diagnostics and performs a short SSH probe for a named connection. It could be more explicit about being read-only, but it implies no side effects.

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 succinctly capture purpose, behavior, and usage context. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Complete for a diagnostic tool with one optional parameter and no output schema. Covers all key aspects: what it returns, when it's useful, and the optional probe behavior.

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% and the description adds meaning by explaining the parameter's effect: a short SSH probe for the named connection, and what happens when omitted (general diagnostics).

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 uses a specific verb ('Return explicit local diagnostics') and resource ('MCP/SSH state'), and clearly differentiates from sibling tools like connect, exec, and file operations by specifying the diagnostic scope.

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 clear diagnostic context ('distinguish server unavailable, SSH unavailable, dead connection, and MCP transport issues') but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare directly to siblings.

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