ssh_tunnel_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description delivers important behavioral traits: it is read-only, does not create/modify/close anything, and only lists tunnels tracked by this process. It also specifies the exact data returned, though it does not cover potential side effects like error handling or resource limits, which are not critical for a simple list operation.

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 compact, well-structured set of three sentences. It leads with the core purpose, lists the output fields, states the read-only nature, and explains the parameter. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 list tool with one optional parameter, the description is complete: it identifies the resource, the filter, the output fields, and the read-only semantics. It doesn't mention pagination or output limits, but these are not essential for a simple listing operation and are not indicated by the presence of an output schema.

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?

The schema already describes the 'server' parameter as a filter, but the description adds the nuance that it filters to one server and that omitting it lists all tunnels across servers. This clarifies the optional behavior beyond the schema's basic description.

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 lists active SSH tunnels tracked by the process, enumerating the specific fields returned. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ssh_tunnel_create and ssh_tunnel_close by being a read-only listing operation.

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 when to use the tool (for inspecting active tunnels) and explicitly notes it is read-only, signaling not to use it for modifications. It does not name alternative tools directly, but the read-only statement and the presence of create/close siblings provide adequate context for an agent.

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