list_servers

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

The description transparently details the return format as a formatted table and documents both error behavior for unknown groups and the message for empty results. Even without annotations, the outcome is clearly described.

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 concise and well-structured, with clear sections for purpose, argument, and return behavior. No unnecessary information is included.

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?

The description provides all necessary context for calling the tool: what it returns, how the parameter behaves, and how errors are surfaced. It is complete even without relying on the output schema.

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?

Although the schema itself has no description, the tool description fully explains the only parameter: group is optional, filters by group name, and omitting it shows all servers. This fully compensates for the schema coverage gap.

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 clearly states the tool lists all configured SSH servers along with their groups and descriptions. The scope is specific and the verb 'list' accurately conveys the read-only nature.

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 explains how to use the optional group filter and points to list_groups for valid group names, but it does not explicitly contrast when to use this tool versus the sibling execution or file-transfer tools. Some inference is required to determine the appropriate context among the alternatives.

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