ssh_list_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states it lists config entries but does not confirm whether the tool is read-only, modifies state, requires authentication, or has side effects. The name implies a read operation, but this is not explicit.

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, concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and efficiently communicates the tool's core function.

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 simple nature of the tool (1 optional parameter, likely returns a flat list) and lack of output schema, the description is almost complete. However, it omits what the output looks like (e.g., list of strings or objects). Sibling context suggests many SSH tools, making this one straightforward but missing return format details.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'filter_tag', and the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's '按标签过滤连接（可选）'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 '列出' (list) and the resource '配置文件中的所有SSH连接' (all SSH connections in configuration file), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ssh_connect (which connects) and ssh_list_connections (likely lists active connections).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ssh_connect_by_name, ssh_connect_by_config_host, or ssh_list_connections. It does not mention prerequisites or when not to use it.

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