list_containers

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'bucketed by state' and 'compact rows', and explains the all_states parameter (list all vs only running). However, it does not describe output format, pagination, error handling, or side effects, leaving gaps for a 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 extremely concise: one line for purpose and two lines for parameters, with no redundancy. Every sentence adds value, and the arg list is well-structured. It avoids fluff and is easy to parse quickly.

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 (2 simple params, no nested objects) and lack of output schema, the description covers the essentials. However, it omits details about the return format or any side effects, which would help an agent fully understand the tool's behavior without additional context.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly explains both parameters: all_states (True lists all, False only running) and target (target name from config, omit for default). It adds meaning beyond the schema's property names and defaults.

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 action: 'List containers, bucketed by state, with compact rows.' It specifies the resource (containers) and the mode (list), distinguishing it from sibling tools like inspect_container or list_pods. The '[READ]' prefix reinforces the read-only nature.

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 explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives such as inspect_container or container_logs. No guidance on when not to use it or which tool to prefer for different needs is provided, leaving the agent to infer usage from the generic 'list' purpose.

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