pty-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'interactive SSH session' and 'persistent session (survives SSH disconnect)' which are useful, but doesn't cover critical aspects like whether this creates a new session or attaches to existing ones (except via session_id parameter), what happens on connection failure, timeout behavior, or security implications of ignore_host_key.

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, efficient sentence that communicates the core functionality without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the main purpose.

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 9 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (session ID? connection status?), doesn't cover error conditions, and provides minimal guidance on parameter interactions. The high parameter count and lack of structured metadata require more comprehensive description.

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?

With 89% schema description coverage, the schema already documents most parameters well. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema - it mentions 'supports key/password auth and SSH config aliases' which hints at key_path/password parameters and possibly host/user, but doesn't provide additional semantic context beyond what's in the parameter 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 the action ('Open an interactive SSH session') and resource (SSH session), specifying support for authentication methods and SSH config aliases. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like create_local_session or create_serial_session, which likely create different types of sessions.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_local_session or create_serial_session. It mentions authentication methods but doesn't explain when to choose this tool over other session creation tools in the sibling list.

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