ssh_session_upload_content

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

With no annotations and a one-line description, the tool's behavior is almost entirely undisclosed. It does not state whether it creates/overwrites a remote file, whether it requires an established session, what permissions are needed, or any side effects. The description provides no value beyond indicating a write action via SSH.

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 this is under-specification rather than conciseness. It omits essential context that would make the tool usable, so it doesn't earn its place as a useful description.

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 three required parameters with no schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It provides almost no information about what the tool does, when to use it, or how to invoke it correctly.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the meaning of the three parameters (content, session_id, remote_path). The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema info, leaving the agent without any guidance on how to use the parameters.

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 'Upload via SSH' is a vague restatement of the tool name. It doesn't specify what is uploaded (content) or where (remote path via an SSH session), and it doesn't distinguish this from sibling upload tools like reverse_shell_upload_content or target_upload_file.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites such as an active SSH session, nor any comparison to other upload mechanisms like target_upload_file or reverse_shell_upload_content.

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