save_server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It indicates mutation (create/update) and local persistence, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether existing connection_id is overwritten), authentication requirements beyond schema, or rate limits. Adequate but not detailed.

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?

Three sentences plus an example, front-loaded with purpose, then usage context. No fluff; every sentence earns its place.

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 6 parameters (5 required) and an output schema (not shown but exists), the description covers usage context well. Could mention the return value (e.g., confirmation of save) but not required since output schema exists. Slightly above adequate.

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 does not add new param semantics beyond the example; the schema already covers each parameter well. No extra value provided.

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 'Persist (create or update) a server connection profile in the local host store', using a specific verb ('persist') and resource ('server connection profile'). It also contrasts with sibling tools like 'remove_server' and 'list_servers' by focusing on creation/update.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('new SSH details, or after an auth_failed error to update credentials') and when NOT to use ('Do not ask for credentials again if they are already saved and still valid'). Includes a concrete example.

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