sftp_write

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects. It explicitly states 'Creates or overwrites the file,' which is the key destructive behavior an agent must know. It does not mention permissions, error behavior, or encoding, but for a simple write tool the main risk is covered.

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 two short sentences. The first front-loads the action and target; the second adds the important overwrite behavior. There is no filler or redundant content.

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 tool with only three simple parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, behavior, and the prerequisite of a connected host. It does not describe return values or failure modes, but these are less critical for a write operation and no output schema exists to elaborate.

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 100%, and each parameter (content, remotePath, connectionId) already has a clear description. The tool description adds no additional parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Write content to a file on a connected remote host via SFTP' and notes it 'Creates or overwrites the file.' It is specific about the verb and resource, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like sftp_upload, which also writes files remotely but presumably starts from a local file.

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 phrase 'on a connected remote host' gives important context that an existing connection is required, which is a useful usage constraint. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as sftp_upload, sftp_download, or sftp_read, leaving some inference to the agent.

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