ssh_command_alias

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states 'no remote execution or side effects', 'stored in local config', and 'Adding an existing alias overwrites it', disclosing key behavioral traits concisely.

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 four sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence adds value. No redundant or extraneous information.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's behavior for its simplicity. It could mention return format or error handling, but the core functionality and constraints are clearly communicated.

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 descriptions are minimal ('Action to perform', etc.), but the tool description adds significant context: it clarifies the relationship between action and required parameters, and specifies that for suggest, the command field serves as a search term. This enhances understanding beyond the schema.

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 it manages local shorthand aliases mapping short names to full command strings, stored locally with no remote execution. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'no remote execution or side effects' and 'local config', differentiating from other SSH tools that involve remote actions.

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 each action's behavior and parameter requirements: add needs both alias and command, remove needs alias, list shows all, suggest returns matches. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives, but the guidance is clear enough for correct invocation.

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