container_remove

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive action ('Remove') and the elevated permission requirement, which is critical behavioral context. However, it doesn't elaborate on consequences like data loss or volume removal, though the 'danger' permission hints at severity.

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 two short sentences, front-loading the action and then adding the permission note. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 two-parameter destructive tool, the description is sufficient: it states what it does and the required permission. No output schema exists, and return values are not critical for a remove operation. It could add more about irreversible effects, but the permission warning compensates slightly.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions for 'id' and 'force'. The tool description adds no additional parameter insight beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Remove a Docker container') with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling container tools like container_list, container_start, and container_stop. It also adds the required permission, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (to remove a container) and a key prerequisite (requires container.danger permission). It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the tool's name and sibling context make this less necessary.

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