Run SSH Diagnostic Command

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds valuable context about being read-only and restricted to allowlisted diagnostics, which aligns with annotations. No contradictions; only minor gap is not detailing exact behavior on failures or non-allowlisted commands.

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?

Two sentences, first states action and result, second provides safety and alternative. Zero fluff, all information earns its place.

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?

With output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description covers purpose, scope, restrictions, and alternatives. Even with moderate tool complexity, it is complete for the agent to decide correct usage.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It mentions connectionId and command implicitly via 'saved SSH connection' and 'diagnostic command', but doesn't explain timeoutMs or workspaceId. Baseline 3 is appropriate since it adds some meaning but not full compensation for all 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 'Runs a single read-only diagnostic command' on a saved SSH connection, with specific output ('returns captured stdout/stderr'). It distinguishes itself from unfour.ssh.exec by explicitly contrasting scope ('allowlisted diagnostics' vs broader execution).

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?

Explicitly says 'Safe in dev/test/prod for allowlisted diagnostics' and directs users to unfour.ssh.exec for broader execution, naming the alternative and clarifying when to use this tool vs not.

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