Manage Container

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

Description discloses idempotency (no-ops), error condition (NOT_FOUND for remove), and dry-run, adding context beyond annotations (idempotentHint=true, no destructive hint). No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Three sentences: first lists actions, second covers behavioral traits, third mentions dry-run. Every sentence adds value, zero redundancy, and critical info is front-loaded.

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 9 parameters, 2 required, no output schema, and multi-action behavior, the description covers actions, preconditions, idempotency, error handling, and dry-run. No gaps for agent decision-making.

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 100%; description adds context by linking parameters to actions (e.g., 'create needs a pre-configured veth interface' reinforces interface parameter). While schema already documents all parameters, the description provides useful actionable hints.

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?

Description clearly states the tool creates, starts, stops, or removes RouterOS containers, listing all four actions. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_containers and other manage_* tools by naming the specific resource and actions.

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?

Explicitly states preconditions: 'create needs a pre-configured veth interface' and behavioral details: 'start/stop are no-ops when already in the target state; remove throws NOT_FOUND when absent'. Also mentions dry-run support, guiding when and how to use.

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