ssh_host_update

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose that 'No credentials needed' and indicates a metadata update rather than a remote operation. However, it does not state whether tag/notes updates replace or merge existing values, or what happens when the alias is not found.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and both sentences carry useful information. The 'No credentials needed' detail is valuable and not wasted.

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 plus schema adequately cover the three updatable fields and the intended use case. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the lack of clarity about overwrite vs. merge behavior and the absence of any response/error semantics leave meaningful gaps for an agent invoking a mutation.

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 property already has a description, so the main description adds no new parameter-level contract. It adds context that notes 'accumulate knowledge for future sessions,' but this does not materially change how parameters should be populated.

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 first sentence names a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('saved host'), and enumerates the exact fields affected: 'notes, description, or tags.' This clearly distinguishes it from ssh_host_add, ssh_host_remove, and the SSH execution/connection tools by focusing on metadata of an existing host.

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 second sentence gives clear situational context: 'Use this to record findings, document issues, or enrich the host profile based on what you learn during operations.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the intended use is obvious relative to the sibling tool list.

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