list_containers

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by specifying the ownership/sharing scope and enumerating the exact fields returned (id, subdomain, public URL, status, creation time), which goes beyond what annotations provide.

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?

A single, tightly worded sentence front-loads the action and resource, then lists the useful return fields. No filler, no repetition of schema or annotation information, and every clause earns its place.

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, parameterless list operation with an output schema present and read-only annotations provided, the description is fully complete. It tells the agent what the tool lists and what data each result will contain; nothing essential is missing.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain. The schema already fully covers this with an empty properties object and 100% schema description coverage. The description instead adds value by describing the output fields, which is appropriate for a parameterless listing tool.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('all BasicDeploy containers'), and a clear scope ('owned by (or shared with) the authenticated user'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_container, which presumably fetches a single container, and create_container, which creates one.

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 clearly implies when to use it: when you need to enumerate containers visible to the authenticated user. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say 'use get_container for a single container', but the context of returning all containers provides clear usage intent without needing exclusions.

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