ssh_exec_batch

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions '错误中断' (error interruption), which merely reflects the stop_on_error parameter in the schema. It does not disclose that the tool executes arbitrary remote commands, potential security implications, output behavior, or sequential execution, leaving significant transparency gaps.

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, concise sentence with no redundant words. It is efficiently front-loaded, stating the primary action and one key feature, and is appropriately sized for the tool's apparent simplicity.

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 an output schema, the description is the only narrative source for understanding the tool. It fails to cover return values, authentication, error handling details, or execution semantics, leaving the agent without critical context for safely invoking this remote command execution tool with four parameters.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds no explanation for host, timeout, commands, or stop_on_error beyond what their names imply; '多条命令' and '错误中断' are just natural-language restatements of the schema properties, providing zero added meaning.

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 states '批量执行多条命令，支持错误中断' (batch execute multiple commands with error interruption), clearly indicating the tool's action and scope. It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling ssh_exec, but 'batch' implies multiple commands, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 executing multiple commands in one call, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus the single-command ssh_exec or other alternatives. The 'batch' wording hints at the use case, but no exclusions or alternative tool references are given.

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