ssh_connection_info

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

注解已声明 readOnlyHint、destructiveHint=false 和 openWorldHint=false，因此安全侧已覆盖。描述额外补充了重要行为背景：不会泄露密码、私钥或口令，且不会打开连接——这是专门针对凭证处理工具的有价值披露，而非重复注解内容。

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?

单句表述，先说明用途，后补充两项限制。零冗余内容，每个分句都增添了独立信息。

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?

对于无参数、无输出 schema、免认证的读取工具，描述已充分说明工具作用及不会发生的情况。输出结构（例如返回哪些字段）未作说明，但由于其返回结构简单，且描述已清楚表明工具属于只读清单类，这一缺口并不严重。

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?

该工具接受零个参数，因此基线为 4。描述正确未虚构任何输入；schema 为空且覆盖率为 100% 与此一致。

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?

句首以明确的动词+资源开头（'查看已配置的 SSH 目标及限制'），描述内容清晰可辨。'不连接远程主机'这一否定说明有效将其与 ssh_test_connection / ssh_exec 区分开来，不过并未点出具体兄弟工具的名称。

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?

使用场景可推断（检查已配置的 SSH 目标），'不连接远程主机'也暗示了不应使用的时机。但未列出替代方案或选择此工具与其他 ssh_* 工具的条件。

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