ssh_shell_read

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

The description discloses no behavioral traits beyond the basic read action. It does not mention that the default behavior is to clear the buffer after reading (as indicated by the 'clear' parameter default), nor any other side effects, blocking behavior, or error conditions. With no annotations, the description should compensate but does not.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it is perhaps overly brief and could include key behavioral context without significantly increasing length.

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 lack of annotations, no output schema, and the presence of many similar sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the relationship to ssh_shell_open, the buffer clearing behavior, or what the output contains. The agent would need to infer much from context.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters, so the schema itself provides adequate semantics. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already states, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 'Read' and the resource 'output from an SSH shell session', which aligns with the tool name and distinguishes it from siblings like ssh_shell_write or ssh_shell_exec. However, it could be more specific about the nature of the output (e.g., buffered output, not streaming).

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like ssh_shell_exec or ssh_shell_write, nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., an open session from ssh_shell_open).

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