ssh_session_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says only 'status' with no mention of return format, side effects, error conditions, or required permissions. The behavior is entirely opaque.

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 but is under-specified rather than concise. It adds no value over the title and leaves essential questions unanswered. A complete sentence with a clear verb is missing.

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 annotations, output schema, and minimal parameter info, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'status' contains (e.g., alive, last heartbeat, connection info) or how this tool fits among the many session-management siblings. An agent cannot reliably select or invoke this tool based on the description.

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?

The input schema has one required parameter, session_id, with zero description coverage. The tool description adds no meaning, failing to explain what session_id represents or where to obtain it. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description does nothing to support schema gaps.

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 is a near-tautology, restating the tool name as 'SSH session status.' It provides no verb or resource distinction beyond the name, and fails to differentiate from sibling tools like ssh_sessions or ctf_status. The agent is left with only the name and a vague noun phrase.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool or how it compares to alternatives. It does not mention that it is for a specific session, nor does it distinguish from ssh_sessions (which likely lists sessions). No prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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