SSH MCP Server

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only adds 'Risk level: low'. It fails to disclose whether the close is graceful, what happens to running commands, or what the output schema contains (despite output schema existing).

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?

Extremely concise with only two sentences. Front-loaded with the core action. The risk level statement earns its place as the only behavioral hint provided.

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 zero annotations, zero schema coverage, and the existence of an output schema, the description is too sparse. It should explain the session_id parameter and ideally reference the return value or success confirmation.

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 has 0% description coverage, yet the description does not compensate by explaining the session_id parameter, its format, or how to obtain it (e.g., from ssh_connect or ssh_list_sessions).

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 a specific verb ('Close') and resource ('persistent SSH session'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like ssh_connect, ssh_list_sessions, and run_ssh_command.

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?

Provides no explicit 'when to use' guidance or workflow context (e.g., 'use when finished with a session'), though the purpose implies cleanup. Does not mention prerequisites like requiring an existing session from ssh_connect.

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