ssh_copy_between

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: streaming through a local temporary file, implying no direct server-to-server connection and potential disk usage. It does not mention cleanup or authentication details, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 concise sentences, with the core mechanism (streaming via temp file) front-loaded. Every sentence contributes meaning without 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?

For a simple four-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and rationale. It omits minor details like authentication prerequisites or error conditions, but the core action and mechanism are sufficiently explained for an agent to use it correctly.

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%, and the description does not elaborate on any of the four parameters (src_server, src_path, dst_server, dst_path). The parameter names are self-explanatory, but the description adds no semantic value, formats, or constraints beyond what the names imply.

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 states a specific verb ('transfer') and a precise resource (a file between two servers via this machine). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ssh_upload/download or ssh_run by its cross-server copy purpose.

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 explains the use case: transferring between servers when they lack mutual trust, because the streaming via a local temporary file avoids trust requirements. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but provides clear contextual guidance.

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