ssh_shell_connection

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

No annotations provided. The description indicates it is a read-only operation (check, shows), but does not disclose whether it queries live state or cached data, or any permissions needed. Basic transparency is adequate for a simple check tool.

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, front-loaded with the verb, no unnecessary words. Efficiently conveys the tool's function.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is fairly complete: it explains purpose and what it shows. However, it could mention the expected output format (e.g., list of IPs) for full completeness.

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 single parameter `session_id` is fully described in the schema as 'The session ID returned by ssh_shell_open'. The description does not add additional meaning beyond that, so 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 clearly states the verb 'Check' and the resource 'active SSH connections on the remote board', and specifies it shows client IPs connected to port 22. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ssh_shell_open or ssh_shell_exec.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose is clear, there is no mention of exclusions or comparison to similar tools like network_scan_tool.

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