Change SSH Password Expiration

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

Annotations only include openWorldHint: true, which indicates external side effects but provides no specific behavioral traits. The description states 'change' but does not disclose whether the action is reversible, requires specific permissions, affects all SSH users, or is synchronous/asynchronous. Since the annotation does not cover these aspects, the description carries the burden and falls short, offering minimal behavioral context.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and clearly states the resource and scope. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient.

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 two-parameter change operation, the description is sparse. It does not mention what the response will look like (e.g., whether it returns an operation ID for polling via kinsta_operations_status) or any prerequisites like authentication or environment status. Given that many sibling tools involve asynchronous operations, an agent may need this context to handle the call correctly. The description is minimally adequate but lacks essential follow-up details.

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?

The schema already provides descriptions for both env_id and exp_interval, including example values for the latter (e.g., days_7, days_14, days_30). The description adds no additional information about the parameters, such as format constraints or relationship between them. With schema coverage at 100%, the baseline is 3, and the description provides no extra value.

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 'Change' and the specific resource 'SSH password expiration interval' with scope 'for an environment'. The verb+resource is unambiguous and distinct from sibling SSH tools like status or toggle. The title and name reinforce this, making the purpose immediately clear.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage when an agent needs to modify the expiration interval, but offers no exclusions or references to other SSH-related tools. No when-not-to-use context is given, so an agent must infer the appropriate use case from the purpose alone.

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