list_active_connections

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

The description clarifies it is a read-only listing with server tags and aliases. No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does not explicitly state non-destructive behavior, but it is implied by 'list'.

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?

Single concise sentence, front-loaded with action and scope. No unnecessary words.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does and what information it provides. No 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?

No parameters exist (0 parameters), so baseline 4 is appropriate. Description adds no parameter-level detail, but none is needed.

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?

Clearly states it lists active SSH connections with server environment tags and alias information. Distinct from sibling tools like 'connect' (establishes connections) and 'list_servers' (shows available servers).

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?

Description implicitly indicates use for identifying connected servers, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to siblings. A small addition could improve.

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