ssh_connect

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It covers authentication methods, parameter defaults, and return value structure. However, it lacks details on error handling, retry behavior, or potential 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 well-structured with a clear opening sentence, followed by an Args list and Returns section. Each sentence adds value, and the overall length is appropriate for the complexity of the tool.

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?

The description covers purpose, all parameters, and return value. Given the presence of an output schema and moderate complexity, it is sufficiently complete. Minor omission of error conditions prevents a score of 5.

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%, but the description provides comprehensive explanations for all 6 parameters, including defaults and usage hints (e.g., leave empty for key-based vs password auth). This adds significant value beyond the 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?

The description uses a specific verb 'Connect' and clearly states the tool's function to establish an SSH connection, returning a session_id for use with other SSH tools. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ssh_execute or ssh_close_session.

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 usage as the entry point for SSH operations by stating the session_id is for use with all other tools. However, it does not explicitly provide when-not-to-use scenarios or mention alternatives.

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