send_input_by_session

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the burden. It mentions interaction with active shell and gives input examples (Ctrl+C, 'q'), but does not disclose whether the session must already exist, what happens if the session is not interactive, or any side effects.

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 with a clear two-paragraph structure: purpose statement followed by arg descriptions. No unnecessary information. Slightly improved by front-loading the key verb-resource.

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 siblings like 'execute_command' and 'send_keys', and an output schema that is not shown, the description lacks details on session prerequisites, error conditions, or post-invocation behavior (e.g., whether input is queued or executed). It is adequate for basic use but incomplete for complex decisions.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates fully by explaining each parameter: 'host' clarified as hostname/IP/alias, 'input_text' with concrete examples, and optionality of 'username' and 'port'. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 it sends input to the active shell of a session. The verb 'send input' and resource 'active shell for a session' are specific, but the description does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'send_input' or 'send_keys' that may have similar purposes.

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?

Provides an example use case ('clearing stuck interactive states') and mentions sending input to the current shell, but does not contrast with alternatives like 'execute_command' or 'send_keys', nor specify when not to use this tool.

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