toggle_ssh

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, giving the safety profile, and the description is consistent with a toggling mutation. It adds the scoping behavior (main vs FTP account) but does not disclose whether existing SSH sessions are affected, whether the change is reversible, or any permission requirements.

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?

Very short and front-loaded: the core action is in the first sentence and each argument gets one tight line. No filler, though the Args block duplicates the schema structure rather than adding narrative.

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?

For a two-parameter mutation with an output schema available (so return values need no explanation) and annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies the key argument semantics and account scoping. Only deeper behavioral details like session impact are absent.

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 carries the full burden: it explains that status uses 1=enable/0=disable and that ftplogin empty means the change applies to the main account. This meaningfully compensates for the undocumented schema, with only minor omissions (e.g. accepted ftplogin format).

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 and resource ('Переключить SSH-доступ' / toggle SSH access) and scopes it to either the main or FTP account. It is clear and separable from the listed siblings, none of which operate on SSH access, though it does not name an alternative.

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 context by explaining that an empty ftplogin applies the change to the main account, which helps the agent pick the right target. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or mention of prerequisites such as required permissions.

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