sassy_setup_ssh

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description discloses key behavioral traits: password is fed via stdin rather than argv, authentication priority at test time, and that save returns status=incomplete on empty credentials. It does not detail where credentials are stored, but covers the most critical side effects and constraints.

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 compact and well-organized, starting with a summary, then a bulleted parameter list, and ending with authentication priority and an edge-case guarantee. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary fluff.

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's complexity (6 parameters, multiple actions, no annotations) and that an output schema exists, the description fully covers the usage context, parameter semantics, security-relevant behavior, and error semantics. It leaves little ambiguity for an agent.

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 input schema provides zero description coverage, but the description compensates fully by explaining each parameter: action values (check|save|test|skip), host/user for save, password via stdin, key as preferred over password, and session carrying host+user+key. It also notes the 'save' action requirement for at least one auth source.

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 tool's purpose: 'Guide SSH/Linux remote setup. Checks plink, saves creds, tests connection.' It enumerates the specific actions and parameters, and does not overlap with sibling setup tools like sassy_setup_check_tools or sassy_setup_wizard.

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 clear usage context: it lists the valid actions and explains authentication priority ('session > key > Pageant > password-via-stdin') and the requirement to pass at least one auth source on save. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the context is sufficient for an agent to decide when to use this tool.

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