register_ssh_key

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals critical side effects: the key is automatically applied to all current and future instances, and it explicitly states that only the .pub file is read, never the private key. This is highly transparent.

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 concise yet complete: it states the endpoint, explains the side effect, adds a safety note, and includes two realistic examples. Every sentence adds value with no padding.

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?

For a simple tool with only two parameters and an output schema, the description covers purpose, behavior, parameter semantics, and safety. The existence of an output schema means return-value details are not required, and the description sufficiently addresses all necessary context.

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 schema has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It does so via concrete examples (name='laptop', public_key_path='C:/Users/me/.ssh/id_ed25519.pub') and the note about reading the .pub file, which clarifies the meaning of public_key_path. It does not explicitly define 'name' beyond the example, but the provided examples are clear enough.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Register a local SSH public key on the Vast.ai account' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from siblings like list_ssh_keys and ssh_exec by focusing on the registration action.

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?

The description implies when to use the tool by showing examples and explaining the key is applied to all current and new instances. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of a full 5.

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