container_stats

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

No annotations provided, but the description includes '[READ]' indicating a read-only operation and 'one-shot' indicating non-streaming. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits.

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 brief and front-loaded with the purpose. Every sentence adds value ('[READ] One-shot...', then clear Args). No redundancy or fluff.

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 simple read tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and parameters. It does not explain return format or error behavior, but these are not critical given the simplicity.

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 description adds meaning to both parameters: container_id can be 'id or name', and target is 'from config' with a note to omit for default. Schema had 0% description coverage, so this compensates well.

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 it's a '[READ]' operation for a 'One-shot CPU%/memory% snapshot', specifying the resource (container stats) and distinguishing it from sibling tools like container_top (process listing) or inspect_container (detailed info).

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'one-shot' and 'stream=false', but there is no explicit comparison or recommendation for selecting this over sibling tools.

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