remote_port_forward_remote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core behavior (listening and forwarding) and the SSH2 session requirement, but does not mention side effects, permissions, or the ongoing nature of the forward beyond the example.

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 front-loaded, using a clear imperative and a helpful example. Every sentence adds value, and the example is particularly instructive without being overly 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?

The tool description covers the core purpose, the direction of forwarding, a requirement (SSH2 session type), and a practical example. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, it provides sufficient context for an agent to select and use the tool, though it could clarify the optional sessionId interplay.

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 schema provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all four parameters. The description adds a concrete example mapping remotePort 8080 to localPort 3000, reinforcing the semantics but not adding new information beyond the schema.

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 'Start a REMOTE port forward (SSH -R style)' and explains the direction: 'Listens on a port on the remote server and forwards connections back to your local machine.' This specific verb+resource description distinguishes it from the sibling remote_port_forward_local.

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 an example ('Expose a local dev server to the remote') and notes the SSH2 session type requirement. It gives clear context for when to use this tool, though it does not explicitly contrast with the local forward tool or mention exclusions.

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