ssh-mcp-pro

Resolve SSH Host

ssh_resolve_host

Read-onlyIdempotent

Resolves SSH host aliases from ~/.ssh/config to retrieve connection parameters like hostname, port, and user for automated connection setup.

Instructions

Resolves a host alias from ~/.ssh/config to connection parameters

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "hostAlias": "<hostAlias>"
    },
    "name": "ssh_resolve_host"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`hostAlias`	Yes	Host alias from SSH config

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`host`	Yes
`port`	No
`username`	No
`proxyJump`	No
`privateKeyPath`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.5Jun 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds value by specifying the source config file (~/.ssh/config). This provides context about where the alias is resolved from, which is beyond what annotations convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the action ('Resolves') and clearly identifies the resource and output, making it efficient for an AI agent to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simple input schema and the presence of an output schema (which likely describes the connection parameters), the description is sufficient. It identifies the config file source, completing the context for a resolution tool. However, it could briefly mention the typical output fields (e.g., hostname, port).

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and describes the hostAlias parameter. The description adds meaning by stating that the alias is resolved from ~/.ssh/config, which provides context about the origin of the alias beyond the schema's generic 'Host alias from SSH config'.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool resolves a host alias to connection parameters, using specific verb 'Resolves' and resource 'host alias from ~/.ssh/config'. This differentiates it from sibling tools like ssh_host_inspect (which inspects host details) and ssh_list_configured_hosts (which lists configured hosts).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or when not to use it. While the purpose implies it is for resolving aliases before connecting, no direct usage context is given.

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