ssh_list_forwards

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It notes that only 'tracked' forwards are listed and includes 'running status', which conveys state reporting. However, it does not explicitly state that this is a non-mutating read operation or disclose any prerequisites or side effects, which would strengthen transparency.

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 sentence of 16 words, efficiently front-loaded with the verb and resource, and then listing the key output fields. Every word contributes value with no 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 absence of an output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields. However, it does not specify the return format (e.g., array vs. object) or the exact behavior of include_stopped beyond the schema. For a simple list tool, this is adequate but has minor gaps.

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 has 100% description coverage for its two parameters (target and include_stopped), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add further parameter semantics; it merely lists 'target' as an output field, which could be slightly confusing but is not harmful.

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 opens with 'List tracked SSH port forwards', a clear verb+resource combination. It enumerates the specific output fields (forward_id, direction, ports, target, running status), distinguishing it from sibling tools like ssh_forward and ssh_stop_forward.

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 clearly implies usage for listing forwards, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives such as ssh_forward or ssh_stop_forward. There is no mention of when not to use it or any exclusions, leaving usage as implied rather than explicit.

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