Check the health status of an SSH connection by specifying host, port, and username.
检查 SSH 连接健康状态
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "health_check"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| host | No | 服务器地址 | |
| port | No | SSH 端口 | |
| username | No | 用户名 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.8.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the purpose but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether it requires an existing connection, what happens on failure, return format, or idempotency.
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 very concise (one sentence). It is front-loaded, but the brevity sacrifices necessary context. It is not excessively long, but could be more informative without being verbose.
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 simple parameters and no output schema, the description should explain what the output or effect is (e.g., returning a boolean or status). It fails to provide that, making the tool behavior ambiguous.
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 baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema parameter descriptions, which already define host, port, and username.
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 tool checks SSH connection health status, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like connect (establish connection) and exec (execute commands), as health check is a diagnostic action.
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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclude any scenarios.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.