ssh_get_local_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description does not contradict these and adds details about the return fields (os, home, cwd, path_style) and the two response formats. No additional behavioral traits are disclosed beyond what annotations imply, but the description is consistent and informative.

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 concise and well-structured. It begins with the core purpose, then provides usage guidance, followed by structured sections for Args, Returns, and Examples. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, non-destructive, read-only), the description covers purpose, usage, parameter details, return fields, and examples. The inclusion of an output schema is noted, but the description itself is complete for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 only parameter, response_format, is documented with its default value and enum options in the 'Args' section of the description. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description fully carries the burden of explaining the parameter, which it does adequately.

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 returns OS, home directory, cwd, and path style of the MCP server machine. It provides a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ssh_upload_file and ssh_download_file by explicitly stating when to call it beforehand.

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 explicitly says 'Call this before ssh_upload_file or ssh_download_file to discover the correct local_path format' and also mentions debugging path errors. This provides clear guidance on when to use the tool and the context for its use.

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