list_containers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention that only running containers are listed by default (unless 'all' is true), nor does it explain output format, side effects, or any limitations. This lack of detail leaves the agent uncertain 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.

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

The description is a concise single sentence that communicates the core purpose without redundancy. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it easily scannable.

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 tool's simplicity and rich parameter schema, the description is adequate but not thorough. There is no output schema, and the description does not clarify what fields are returned (e.g., IDs, names, statuses) or the default behavior regarding stopped containers, leaving minor gaps for a list operation.

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 input schema already documents all four parameters with descriptions, achieving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter information, so it meets the baseline without adding extra value.

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 lists Docker containers, using the specific verb 'List' with resource 'Docker containers'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like inspect_container (which focuses on a single container) and container_logs (which retrieves logs).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'with optional filters' hints at filtering capabilities but does not state appropriate contexts, exclusions, or relationships to sibling tools like compose_status or list_images.

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