skypilot_ssh_up

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

Annotations already declare openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond that by noting it returns a request_id, implying an async/queued operation an agent must track. However, it omits auth requirements and how the request_id is consumed (e.g., via get_request).

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and default source file, followed by optional-parameter guidance and the return note. No filler; slightly more could be said about request tracking, but it is tight.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained (though request_id is mentioned anyway). For an async deploy tool, the description leaves unclear how to follow up on the request and what environment/auth it needs, which an agent would want.

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 schema itself documents nothing about 'file' or 'infra'. The description loosely maps them ('a specific infra name or config file path') and marks them optional, which partially compensates, but it lacks format, default behavior, or the relationship between the two parameters.

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?

States a specific verb (deploy) plus the exact resource (SSH node pools) and its default source file, which lets an agent separate it from the many cluster/serve/pool siblings. It does not explicitly name skypilot_ssh_down as its counterpart, but the action is unambiguous.

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 through the optional 'infra name or config file path' hints, but never states when to prefer this over alternatives like skypilot_local_up or skypilot_pool_apply, nor any prerequisites or when-not-to-use conditions. Usage is implied rather than spelled out.

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