ssh_stop_forward

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that it stops and returns final status, but does not explain side effects (e.g., whether the session remains open, forward is removed from tracking, or if stopping is reversible). Insufficient for a mutation-like operation.

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?

A single concise sentence with the verb first, no filler. It efficiently states the action and result, though it lacks additional structural detail for edge cases.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate—it states the action and that status is returned. However, it misses usage context and behavioral nuance (e.g., how final status is determined, what happens to the forward tracking), leaving clear 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the parameter forward_id is already documented. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; 'tracked' is implied by the tool name. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Stop') and resource ('tracked SSH port forward') with a clear action. The word 'tracked' helps distinguish from generic stopping (e.g., ssh_stop_session), but it does not name alternative tools, so it is clear but not fully differentiating.

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 versus siblings like ssh_stop_session or ssh_forward. It implies usage (stop a tracked forward) but offers no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative recommendations.

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