ssh_key_manage

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states 'Manage SSH host keys for security verification' but fails to disclose side effects like modifying known_hosts, prompt behavior for untrusted keys, or idempotency. The term 'manage' is too vague to inform an agent of behavioral traits.

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 extremely short (6 words), which is under-informative rather than concise. It lacks structure and does not front-load any critical usage details. Every sentence should earn its place, but here it fails to provide enough context.

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 tool has 3 parameters with enum actions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely lacking. It does not explain what each action does, required auth, or return values. For a tool with destructive potential (remove, autoAccept), this is inadequate.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate. It does not clarify parameter relationships or provide examples.

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?

Description clearly states the tool manages SSH host keys, which is a specific resource. However, it doesn't list the specific actions (verify, accept, etc.) that are available, making it slightly vague. Given the sibling tools, it stands out as the key management tool, so purpose is clear but not maximally specific.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ssh_connection_status or ssh_execute. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as needing existing SSH connections, or when to avoid actions like autoAccept.

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