ssh_grep

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses returning matching lines with file paths and line numbers, but does not mention SSH dependencies, performance implications, error handling, or scope (current directory default). Adequate but not thorough.

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 concise paragraph followed by a well-structured args list. Every sentence adds value; no fluff. Front-loaded with the main purpose.

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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description reasonably covers each parameter's role. Missing aspects like return format details (already stated), error behavior, and default values for path/glob/max_results. Acceptably complete for a search tool.

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 0%, and the description compensates by explaining each parameter: pattern (RE), path (directory/file), glob (filter pattern), max_results, context_lines, case_insensitive, host (from config). These add meaning beyond schema types and defaults, though some descriptions are minimal.

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 states 'Search for a pattern in files on the remote server using grep' with a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like ssh_find_files (finds by name) and ssh_read_file (reads entire files).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Usage is implied from the description (pattern-based search), but no exclusions or context for sibling comparisons.

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