docker_start

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without revealing side effects (e.g., what if container is already running? Are there permissions required? Does it block until started?). This is a severe gap for a mutation 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 single short sentence, which is concise but at the cost of completeness. It earns its place (no fluff) but could front-load additional context like prerequisites or return behavior in the same space. It is minimally adequate.

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's simplicity (1 param, no output schema) and lack of annotations, the description is incomplete. It omits crucial context: what state the container must be in, what happens on error, and whether the operation is asynchronous. A more complete description would aid proper 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 100% (one parameter 'container' with description). The tool description adds no further meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Per guidelines, baseline is 3 when schema coverage is high, and description doesn't detract or add significantly.

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 Docker container' clearly states the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like docker_stop, docker_restart, and docker_list. However, it could be more specific (e.g., 'start a stopped container') to avoid ambiguity with 'create' or 'run'.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like docker_exec (run commands), docker_logs (view output), or docker_stats (monitor). The description does not specify prerequisites (e.g., container must exist) or conditions for use, leaving the agent to infer context.

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