ssh_upload_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the upload overwrites existing files, requires an active connection, or has any side effects on the remote server. The description is too terse to convey these important behaviors.

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 wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded, stating the core action immediately, and is easily parsed by an agent.

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 file upload tool with fully described parameters, the description is minimally viable. However, it lacks behavioral context such as overwrite policy, required connection state, and any error conditions, which could affect an agent's invocation. The absence of an output schema means description should clarify return values, but it does not.

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 provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all three parameters (localPath, remotePath, connectionId). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Upload'), the object ('a file'), and the destination ('remote server'), which is specific and distinguishes this tool from siblings like ssh_download_file and ssh_read_file. The verb-resource pairing is unambiguous and matches the tool's name.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ssh_download_file or ssh_exec. It also does not mention prerequisites like having an active SSH connection, though the schema hints at this via connectionId.

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