ssh_shell_open

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context about interactive/full-screen behavior and session lifecycle, but it does not explain what the tool returns after opening a session, how the session handle is used, or any authentication/terminal requirements.

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 short, front-loaded with the core purpose, and then gives usage guidance, the alternative, and a lifecycle instruction. Every sentence adds value, with no fluff or repetition.

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 covers when to use the toolro and alternatives, but it lacks parameter-level guidance and does not describe return values or how the interactive session is consumed by sibling tools. It is adequate for a basic understanding but not fully complete for correct invocation.

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 only 17%; only 'term' has a description. The tool description does not explain the meaning of 'server', 'command', 'marker_prompt', 'cols', or 'rows'. Some parameter names are self-explanatory, but 'marker_prompt' especially remains opaque, and the description does not compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 that the tool opens an interactive shell on a server via the verb 'Открыть' and the resource 'интерактивную оболочку'. It further distinguishes itself by giving concrete interactive examples (nano, whiptail, htop) and by contrasting with ssh_run.

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 explicitly specifies when this tool is appropriate ('где команда что-то спрашивает или рисует полноэкранный интерфейс') and tells the agent to use ssh_run for ordinary commands. It also instructs the agent to close the session afterward.

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