list_compose_stacks

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

The description includes a [READ] tag indicating it's read-only and explains the reconstruction from labels. Without annotations, it provides basic behavioral context but lacks details on potential performance implications or caching.

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 concise with a clear summary and structured Args section. The front-loaded sentence captures the essence, but could be slightly more direct.

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 simple parameter and no output schema, the description is moderately complete. It explains the core functionality but omits details on how stacks relate to other concepts and the exact health rollup interpretation.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description only gives a one-line explanation for the 'target' parameter ('Target name from config; omit for the default.'). No additional semantics like example values or constraints.

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 groups containers into Compose projects with a health rollup, and explains it works on both Docker and Podman. However, it doesn't fully distinguish from the sibling tool 'list_stacks', which could be similar.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No when-not-to-use or context provided for choosing between list_compose_stacks and siblings like list_containers or list_pods.

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