ssh_exec

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It mentions output return and gives parameter constraints (host format, known_hosts policy), but does not cover authentication, connection lifecycle, side effects of command execution, or error handling. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences conveying core usage and key parameter details. No redundant information, and critical points are front-loaded. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool has 8 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema (not shown), the description is somewhat incomplete. It fails to explain the return format, error behavior, authentication requirements, or how the timeout and jump host work. It covers the most essential parts but leaves gaps for a complex SSH execution tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description adds crucial meaning for two of eight parameters (host and known_hosts). It explains host can be an alias or user@host, and known_hosts accepts specific values. However, six parameters (command, timeout, user, port, key_path, jump) lack any description, limiting overall semantic clarity.

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 'Run a command on a remote host over SSH and return its output,' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like ssh_check (connectivity check) and ssh_download (file transfer), making its purpose unambiguous.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., shell_exec for local commands, ssh_spawn for interactive sessions). The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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