ssh_host_remove

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive consequence (removing and re-adding loses every unsupplied field) and the storage location behavior, but omits permission/auth requirements and whether removal is reversible. Strong disclosure but not complete.

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?

Front-loads the core action and the alternative-tool routing. The parenthetical about never reading the file directly and the Returns block add some length, but each sentence largely 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?

An output schema exists, so the brief 'Returns: Dictionary with operation status' is sufficient. For a single-param mutation tool the critical caution (data loss on re-add) is covered, though auth/permission context is absent.

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% for the single host_name param, whose 'user@hostname' format is already documented in the schema. The description adds no format or semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Remove a host configuration from the host configuration TOML file') and names the sibling it is not (ssh_host_update for modification). An agent can distinguish it from the update/add/list siblings without opening any schema.

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 routes the agent: use ssh_host_update to modify fields, use ssh_host_list to inspect configuration, and remove only for deletion. The when-to-use-vs-alternative conditions are stated directly, not inferred.

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