get_docker_ps_all

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It correctly indicates network connectivity and SSH authentication are required. However, it does not disclose potential failure modes (e.g., host unreachable, Docker not installed) or the output format, leaving gaps in transparency for a command execution tool.

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?

One sentence with no superfluous words; action, resource, and method are front-loaded. Every word is necessary.

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 presence of an output schema, return value details are likely covered. However, the description lacks mention of prerequisites (Docker, SSH access), error conditions, or authentication methods. For a simple remote command tool, it is functional but not fully complete.

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 parameter description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'via SSH', hinting at host, user, port, etc., but does not explain meaning or constraints for any parameter (e.g., host format, password vs key authentication). The agent must rely on parameter names, which may be ambiguous (e.g., 'password' without format).

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 tool collects 'docker ps --all' output from a remote Linux host via SSH. The verb 'collects' and the specific command identify the action, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools, none of which are Docker-related.

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 implies usage for retrieving Docker container status from a remote host, which is clear from the context. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like Docker being installed on the remote host.

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