ssh_hooks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden and handles it well. It explicitly discloses the side-effect profile: changes are local, persistent, have no immediate remote action, and affect later operations. It also describes what list and status reveal, which is useful behavioral context.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core resource and key constraint. The main redundancy is the phrase 'The action selects behavior,' which is followed by an explicit enumeration, but the overall structure is dense and scannable.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it covers all action branches, parameter usage, side effects, persistence, and the nature of list/status output. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning by explaining what each action does and clarifying that enable and disable both require the hook name. This goes beyond the terse schema descriptions and the raw enum values.

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?

Clearly identifies the resource as SSH automation hooks and names the supported operations: list, enable, disable, and status. The phrase 'local configuration only with no immediate remote action' helps distinguish this tool from remote-execution siblings like ssh_execute and ssh_deploy.

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 explains when each action is appropriate, including that list and status are informational, while enable and disable require a hook name. It also notes the tool only affects local configuration and has no immediate remote action, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or when not to use this one beyond that scope.

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