ssh_host_remove

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Remove' signals a destructive action, but nothing is disclosed about irreversibility, behavior when the alias does not exist, whether active connections to that host are affected, or what the tool returns. For a deletion operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 compact sentence stating verb and object with zero filler. The destructive intent is front-loaded in the first word, and every word earns its place.

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 tool is simple (one required parameter, no output schema), and the description plus schema cover the core invocation need. However, with no annotations and no output schema, an agent is left uninformed about failure modes and side effects of an irreversible deletion, so the definition is adequate but leaves clear gaps.

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%—the single 'alias' parameter is already documented as 'Alias of the host to remove'. The description adds no further parameter-level meaning, such as where to discover valid aliases or whether matching is case-sensitive, so the baseline 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 pairs a specific verb ('Remove') with a precise resource ('a saved SSH host configuration'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ssh_host_add, ssh_host_update, ssh_host_list, and ssh_disconnect. The qualifier 'saved' clarifies it operates on persisted configuration rather than live connections, so an agent can tell it apart without opening the schema.

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 purpose statement implies the natural use case—remove a saved host when it is no longer needed—but the description offers no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives such as ssh_host_update for modifying rather than deleting an entry. Usage context must be inferred from the tool's name and sibling set rather than stated.

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