ssh_execute_sudo

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the core operation without explaining side effects, authentication requirements, or error handling. The schema hints that the sudo password is masked, but the description does not clarify security implications or output behavior, leaving significant gaps.

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 a single sentence, which is concise and front-loaded with the core action. However, it could be expanded slightly to include usage context without becoming verbose. It earns a 4 for efficiency but not a 5 due to lack of additional structural elements.

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 the complexity (5 parameters, security-sensitive operation) and lack of output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain return values, error states, or the workflow (e.g., how password authentication works, timeout consequences). Essential context for safe usage is missing.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it merely restates the tool's purpose. Parameters like 'password' and 'timeout' have individual schema descriptions, but the description does not provide context on how they interact or order of precedence.

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 'Execute command with sudo on remote server' clearly identifies the action (execute), the resource (command with sudo), and the context (remote server). It distinguishes from sibling 'ssh_execute' by explicitly mentioning sudo, making the purpose 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?

No explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'ssh_execute'. The description does not mention prerequisites, such as requiring sudo privileges, or scenarios where sudo is not applicable. An agent must infer usage solely from the name and sibling context.

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