mcpdockery

by Chandrakant1988

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

container_restart

Restart a Docker container by its name.

Instructions

Restarting a container Args: container_name: name to restart the container

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "container_name": "<container_name>"
    },
    "name": "container_restart"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`container_name`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 7, 2026

TDQS

D1.7/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

There are no annotations and the description gives no insight into side effects, such as whether the container's state is preserved, whether it performs a graceful shutdown, or whether it forces a restart. The user is left completely in the dark about the tool's behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise, which is positive, but it is so brief that it omits critical information. It is a single sentence with no structure or additional context, making it efficient yet insufficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the rich set of sibling tools (start, stop, inspect, logs, etc.), this description fails to place restart in context. It does not explain what happens to running processes, how it interacts with container state, or what output might be expected. Despite having an output schema, it is not described.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The only parameter, container_name, is listed in the schema but the description adds no additional meaning—no format, no examples, no constraints, and no indication of whether it must be an ID or a name. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but does not.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a clear verb ('Restarting') and resource ('a container'), but does not clarify what restarting entails (stop then start) or how it differs from sibling tools like container_start or stop_container. It is understandable but lacks sufficient differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as container_start, stop_container, or container_exec. The description does not mention scenarios where restart is preferred or any prerequisites (e.g., container must already exist).

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