harden_ssh

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it creates a drop-in file and modifies SSH settings (disable root login, disable password auth, set MaxAuthTries). The warning about key-based auth addresses a key risk. However, it omits details about reversibility, whether sshd is restarted, or permissions needed.

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 two sentences, front-loads the purpose, and includes an important warning. Every word adds value, with no 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?

Given no annotations, 5 parameters, and no output schema, the description provides essential purpose and a prerequisite but lacks explanation of output, errors, or post-conditions. It could be more complete by hinting at the expected effect on SSH connectivity.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It explains three of five parameters (disableRootLogin, disablePasswordAuth, maxAuthTries) and their defaults, but misses 'alias' (required) and 'sudo_password'. The description does not clarify that 'alias' is a host identifier or that sudo_password is needed for privilege escalation.

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 applies SSH hardening best practices, specifying actions like disabling root login and password auth. It distinguishes itself from siblings like ssh_connect or add_authorized_key which serve different purposes.

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 explicitly warns users to ensure key-based authentication is working before running, providing a critical prerequisite. It implies when not to use the tool but does not explicitly compare to other tools like fail2ban_status or security_audit.

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