ssh_monitor

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states 'Monitor system resources' with no details on behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, requires specific permissions, or could impact server performance. The tool's actions beyond reading are unclear.

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 with no filler, front-loaded with the key action and resource. It is concise, though it could be slightly expanded to cover all enum values without becoming verbose.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description does not provide sufficient context for the agent to understand return format, continuous monitoring behavior, or how to interpret results. It only covers basic purpose and omits details about the continuous monitoring parameters (interval, duration).

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 each parameter is documented. The description adds some context by listing the resource types (CPU, RAM, disk), but it does not fully align with the enum which includes network and process. Overall, the description provides minimal additional meaning 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 the tool monitors system resources (CPU, RAM, disk) on a remote server, using the specific verb 'Monitor'. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like ssh_health_check or ssh_process_manager, and the enum type includes 'network' and 'process' not listed in the description.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., ssh_execute for running custom commands, ssh_health_check for overall health). The description does not mention prerequisites or context for use.

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