arcane_start_container

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Start a container' without revealing any side effects, prerequisites, or effects on the container or environment. There is no information about what happens during startup, whether the container must already exist, or any impact on the environment.

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 appropriately concise at one sentence, but it is also under-specified. It front-loads the core action but lacks any supporting detail, making it minimally sized without being effectively informative. It is not verbose, but it does not fully earn its place beyond reiterating the name.

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?

The tool has no annotations and no output schema, and the description is insufficient to cover the context. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or relationship to the environment. For a lifecycle operation with sibling tools, this is incomplete.

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 describes both parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, but that is acceptable given the schema already provides descriptions for containerId and environmentId.

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 'Start a container' clearly identifies the action (start) and the resource (container), but does not differentiate it from sibling tools like restart_container or create_container. It is clear but lacks the specificity to distinguish it from related lifecycle operations.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as arcane_stop_container or arcane_restart_container, nor does it state any prerequisites or exclusions. This is a significant gap for a tool with many sibling operations.

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