ssh_shell_exec

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It reveals the core behavior (send command, wait, read output) and the combined write+delay+read operation, but omits important details like timeout handling, resident vs normal command defaults, buffer clearing, and whether Ctrl+C is sent on timeout. The schema documents some of this, but the description itself is incomplete.

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 no fluff. The first sentence is action-oriented and the second concisely explains the operational combination. Every word earns its place.

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 description is adequate for a basic understanding but lacks critical context for a tool with complex behavior. With no output schema and no annotations, it should explain return value shape, timeout behavior, and the resident-command sampling mechanism. The schema provides some parameter details, but the description alone is insufficient for fully informed use.

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 fully documents all five parameters. The description adds no parameter-level semantics beyond the general notion of sending a command, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 sends a command to an SSH shell session and waits for output. It explicitly says it combines write + delay + read in one call, which differentiates it from sibling tools like ssh_shell_write and ssh_shell_read.

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 indicates this is for one-shot command execution that writes, waits, and reads in a single call. This gives clear context for when to use it instead of separate write/read steps, though it doesn't explicitly list when-not-to-use or alternatives.

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