ssh_setup_key_auth

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 explains the tool's actions (keypair generation, public key installation, credential saving), which are inherently destructive (overwriting keys/credentials) and involve network changes. However, it does not mention error conditions, idempotency, or what happens if the key already exists or the connection fails.

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, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys the three-step process. Every part is essential, and no words are wasted.

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 complexity of the tool (multiple steps, side effects) and the absence of an output schema or annotations, the description provides a clear overview of what the tool does. However, it could be more complete by noting that the tool modifies the remote server's authorized_keys and saves a local credential, which are irreversible actions.

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?

Although the input schema already has 100% coverage with descriptions, the tool description adds context by explaining that 'key_name' defaults to credential_name or connection_name, and 'overwrite_saved_credential' controls overwriting existing credentials. This adds meaning beyond the schema's raw descriptions.

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 a three-step process: generating a keypair, installing the public key on a remote server, and saving a credential for future use. It uses specific verbs (generate, install, save) and identifies the resources (local SSH keypair, remote server, credential), distinguishing it from siblings like ssh_connect or ssh_save_credentials.

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 implies that this tool is used for setting up key-based authentication after password authentication, as the required 'connection_name' parameter refers to an 'Existing active SSH connection that authenticated with a password'. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among siblings for similar tasks.

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