remote_ssh_exec

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

Without annotations, the description should disclose whether the tool is read-only or mutable, and any side effects. It states 'execute' implying potential harm, but the '[SAFE]' tag contradicts that. No details on authentication, permissions, or error behavior are provided.

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 at one sentence, but it sacrifices completeness. It front-loads the '[SAFE]' tag, yet the value is limited given the lack of essential details.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and numerous sibling tools, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain how to construct the command, handle authentication, or interpret results.

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 description adds no meaning beyond the schema's parameter names. With 0% schema description coverage, the agent gets no help understanding 'host', 'command', 'user', or 'port' formats or required values.

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 (execute a command) via a specific method (SSH on a remote host), distinguishing it from sibling tools that deal with cloud APIs, containers, or system monitoring.

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 vs alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or safety considerations. The '[SAFE]' tag hints at intended safety but lacks explicit usage context.

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