operate_ftp

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only lists the operations. It does not disclose side effects such as dropping active FTP sessions on stop/restart, required permissions, or whether the service must exist beforehand.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with the resource first and the actionable options immediately after. It is efficient, though the terse phrasing leaves no room for the behavioral context the tool lacks elsewhere.

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 service-control tool with a one-value enum in the schema and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient to invoke it. However, with zero annotations it should say more about side effects and preconditions before an agent safely calls stop or restart.

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 single parameter has an enum in the schema (start/stop/restart), so the allowed values are already documented structurally. The description repeats that same enum rather than adding format or effect details, so it provides marginal value over 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?

States a clear verb+resource (Operate FTP) and enumerates the exact actions via the parenthetical. This distinguishes it from read-only FTP siblings like list_ftp_users or get_ftp_base_info, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or scope.

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?

No when-to-use guidance is provided. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., FTP service must be installed) or conditions for choosing start vs stop vs restart. Usage is only implied by the operation enum.

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