Create SSH Connection

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations: optional secret input is stored in the OS credential store, only a credential reference is persisted, and the tool never returns the secret or credential reference. This meaningfully discloses side effects and data handling. It does not mention all possible side effects, but the added detail is strong.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and contains no filler. Every sentence contributes meaningful information about creation and credential handling.

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 tool has nine parameters, four required fields, and zero schema-level descriptions, the description is not complete enough for reliable invocation. It covers credential storage well but omits guidance on authKind selection, keyPath vs. secret, port defaults, workspaceId usage, and the meaning of credentialRef as an input. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but parameter context remains a major gap.

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 nine undocumented parameters. It only clarifies the behavior of 'secret' and 'credentialRef', leaving host, username, authKind, port, keyPath, and workspaceId unexplained. This is insufficient for an agent to correctly populate the parameters.

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 tool's action: 'Creates a saved SSH connection through the Unfour command bus.' The verb 'creates' plus the resource 'saved SSH connection' precisely identifies the tool's function and distinguishes it from siblings like unfour.ssh.list_connections or unfour.db.create_connection.

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 implies usage for persisting an SSH connection, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as unfour.ssh.exec for ad-hoc commands or unfour.db.create_connection for database connections. There is clear context but no explicit when/when-not guidance or named alternatives.

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