ssh_list_sessions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, and the description details the return fields, including 'tmux_session_name for cross-referencing with tmux ls,' which is a useful behavioral hint. It does not mention default values like include_exited=true, but the schema covers that.

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?

Two sentences with the verb and resource front-loaded. Every clause adds value: the list of return fields and the cross-referencing hint. No filler or redundancy.

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?

The tool is a simple list operation with three optional parameters fully described in the schema. The description explicitly enumerates the output fields, compensating for the lack of an output schema, and adds a practical cross-referencing note. This is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description's only added semantic value is the tip about using session_name to find a specific named session, which is a minor usage nuance rather than a meaningful semantic expansion.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('tracked SSH sessions'), specifies the exact fields returned, and distinguishes it from sibling tools that operate on sessions (stop, exec, read, edit, etc.). The mention of 'session_id, session_name, target, state, uptime' adds specificity that makes the 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?

Provides a clear usage tip: 'Use session_name filter to find a specific named session.' This gives practical guidance on when to use the filter. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when not to use this tool, so it stops short of full usage differentiation.

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