ssh_download_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Download a remote file,' which implies a read from remote and write to local, but it does not disclose whether existing local files are overwritten, whether directories are created, or what error conditions might arise (e.g., authentication failures). This is a significant gap for a file transfer operation.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action and target. It is appropriately sized and contains no wasteful filler.

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 tool with 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not indicate what the tool returns (e.g., success message, file size), how authentication works, or any edge cases. The tool's complexity demands more context than a simple one-liner.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all 7 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate because the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 ('Download') and the resource ('a remote file'), and adds the transport mechanism ('via SFTP channel'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ssh_upload_file (opposite direction) and ssh_exec (command execution).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it is for file transfer rather than command execution, nor does it note authentication prerequisites (e.g., password vs. private key). No exclusions or alternative tool recommendations are given.

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