ssh_shell_resize

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

The description makes the primary behavior clear — resizing the session window's dimensions — and hints at the expected effect on TUI output. However, with no annotations provided, it does not disclose side effects on the running session, whether existing output/scrollback is affected, or failure behavior.

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, and contains no filler; the first clause states the action, and the second gives the practical trigger. It is appropriately terse, though its brevity is partly responsible for the missing parameter and side-effect context.

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 tool with no output schema, no annotations, and 0% schema parameter descriptions, the description must carry more context. It does not say that 'session' likely refers to an open shell session from ssh_shell_open, what happens if the session is not active, or what result/error behavior to expect.

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%, so the description must compensate for the three undocumented parameters. It adds generic meaning around resizing a window, but it never explains the semantics of 'session', valid ranges for cols/rows, or how the parameters interact with the TUI. This is an under-compensated gap.

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 and resource: resize the SSH session window, and adds a clear use case ('useful if the TUI truncates content'). It is clearly distinct from sibling shell operations like open/send/read/close, though it does not explicitly name any alternative tool.

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 provides a concrete signal for when to use the tool: when a TUI is clipping or cutting off content. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the use case is clear enough for a reasonably informed agent.

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