ssh_connect

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose that a connection is established and that a connectionId is returned for later operations, and it highlights jump host support. However, it does not explain connection lifecycle, failure behavior, or whether the connection persists until ssh_disconnect.

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 three concise sentences. The core action is front-loaded, and each sentence adds distinct information: what the tool does, the jump host capability, and the return value. There is no fluff or repetition.

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 is adequate for a 7-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, but it has clear gaps. It does not state the minimal set of required fields, connection lifecycle, or how the connectionId feeds into sibling tools. The rich schema compensates for some of this, but the description alone leaves important context implicit.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters, including alias as connectionId and the jumpHost structure. The description adds minimal parameter-level insight beyond restating jump host support, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 and resource: 'Establish an SSH connection', and adds meaningful detail about jump hosts and returning a connectionId. This clearly differentiates it from execution and file-transfer siblings like ssh_exec and sftp_read, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 context by mentioning jump hosts for internal networks and returning a connectionId for subsequent operations. However, it never explicitly states when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ssh_host_add or ssh_exec, nor does it give exclusions or prerequisites.

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