enable_ssh

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

Descriptions carries full burden since no annotations exist. It only states the core action without disclosing behavioral traits such as whether existing SSH sessions are affected, whether a service restart occurs, or if special permissions are needed. This is minimal for a mutating operation.

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 a single short phrase with zero wasted words. It is perfectly concise and structured for quick parsing.

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 enable/disable operation with a fully documented schema and an output schema, the minimal description is mostly adequate. However, the lack of behavioral transparency and usage guidance leaves gaps for an agent needing to assess side effects or prerequisites.

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 coverage is 100% (both 'enabled' and 'port' have descriptions). The description adds no extra parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate—the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 action: '启用/禁用 SSH 服务' (enable/disable SSH service). This specifies the verb and resource precisely, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like enable_telnet or enable_ftp.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, preconditions, or situations where SSH should not be toggled. The context is entirely implied by the tool name.

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