ssh_cmd_run

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses timeout handling (I/O and runtime) and that status indicates success or failure type. Lacks details on execution environment, security, or implications of sudo usage. Adequate but not comprehensive for a command execution tool.

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?

Well-structured with main purpose first, then timeout details, then pointers to sibling tools. While a bit verbose, every sentence adds value. Could be slightly more concise, but effectively communicates key information.

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 complexity (4 params, output schema, sibling tools), description covers command execution and timeout handling. Does not mention prerequisite of being connected to a host (sibling ssh_conn_connect exists). Output schema is available, so return description is sufficient. Missing connection context is a gap.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds minimal extra meaning: 'work with runtime_timeout primarily' is a usage hint. Otherwise, parameters are fully described in the schema, so description does not significantly enhance understanding beyond defaults and types.

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?

Clearly states 'Execute a command on the remote host and return the results.' Identifies the verb (execute) and resource (command on remote host). Differentiates from siblings by mentioning handling of immediate and long-running operations, and references related tools for checking, killing, and history.

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 advises to prioritize runtime_timeout and describes the workflow after timeout (use ssh_cmd_check). Mentions polling with wait_seconds and alternatives like ssh_cmd_kill and ssh_cmd_history. Could be more explicit about when not to use this tool (e.g., for status checks only), but provides clear context for typical usage.

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