paserver_scratch_dir

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It adds meaningful behavioral context: PAServer's restricted-mode path layout, the default restricted mode, and how to discover remote_user. 'Return' implies a read-only helper, and the path formula is disclosed clearly.

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 well-structured and front-loaded: purpose first, then path context, then usage, then args. Every sentence adds useful information and the Args section is clean and readable.

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?

With an output schema available and only two required parameters, this description is complete. It covers purpose, path construction, when to use it, and how to obtain the parameter values. No critical context is missing.

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 0%, but the description fully compensates. It explains profile with a concrete example ('MACBOOK') and explains remote_user as the Unix username running paserver, including how to find it via SSH or PAServer terminal output.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Return PAServer's per-profile scratch directory path on the remote host.' This clearly distinguishes it from transfer tools like paserver_put/paserver_get and from generic server info tools like paserver_info.

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?

It explicitly says to use this helper before paserver_put/paserver_get or to clean up after a build. It doesn't spell out when-not-to-use scenarios or name direct alternatives, but the intended usage is unambiguous.

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