ssh_list_connections

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

The description implies a read-only operation, but no annotations are provided to confirm safety. It doesn't disclose if the connections are to local or remote hosts, or if authentication is needed. With no annotations, the description should be more transparent. However, it is straightforward.

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?

Very concise at 5 words, but it lacks any additional context or structure. Could benefit from a sentence about the return format. Still, it is not verbose.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it could mention what information is returned (e.g., host, port, user). The tool is simple, so a 3 is reasonable.

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?

Input schema has no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description correctly indicates no parameters needed, so no additional semantics are necessary.

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 it lists active SSH connections, distinguishing it from sibling tools like ssh_connect, ssh_disconnect, or ssh_list_saved_credentials. It could be more specific about the format or contents of the list, but it is clear enough for an agent.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention when to use ssh_list_saved_credentials instead. The agent must infer from names alone, which may be ambiguous.

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