kinsta_sftp-users_toggleEnable or disable additional SFTP/SSH accounts for a Kinsta environment. Provide the environment ID and set enabled to true or false to control access.
Enable or disable additional SFTP/SSH accounts for an environment.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| env_id | Yes | The environment ID | |
| enabled | Yes | Whether to enable (true) or disable (false) additional accounts |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotation openWorldHint=true signals that the tool has side effects beyond the parameters, but the description does not disclose any specifics about these effects. It doesn't say whether disabling removes existing accounts, whether the change is reversible, or what impact it has on the environment. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotation, which is a gap for a mutation tool.
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, focused sentence that leads with the action and resource. It is front-loaded and contains no filler or redundancy, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.
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?
Given the openWorldHint and the mutation nature, the description is incomplete. It doesn't clarify whether 'additional accounts' refers to the feature as a whole or individual accounts, nor does it explain the expected outcome or side effects. There is no output schema, so the agent has no indication of the return value. A simple toggle tool still needs more context for safe invocation.
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 input schema already provides clear descriptions for both parameters (env_id and enabled) with 100% coverage. The tool description restates the purpose of 'enabled' but adds no new information about parameter formatting, constraints, or usage. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the meaning.
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 (enable or disable) on a specific resource (additional SFTP/SSH accounts) for an environment. It implies a distinction from sibling tools like list/add/remove by focusing on the toggle action, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives. The verb and object are specific and understandable.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., environment must exist) or contrast with kinsta_sftp-users_add/remove or kinsta_environments_ssh_toggle. The agent is left to infer the appropriate context from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.