List Docker Hosts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Returns all' suggests read-only behavior, and the context about docker_host adds some value. However, it does not explicitly state that no data is modified, nor does it disclose any authentication or side-effect considerations beyond what a list operation implies.

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 two sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second adds useful context about how the returned hosts are used. No wasted words or redundancy.

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 read-only list operation with one optional parameter and an output schema available, the description provides sufficient purpose and context. It clearly defines what is returned and why the information matters, making it complete for agent selection.

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%, with the single parameter includeSecrets thoroughly documented in the schema (default, behavior, and env var alternative). The tool description adds no additional parameter information, but the schema fully covers it, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'Returns' with the resource 'all docker daemon connections configured in Uptime Kuma,' clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like listMonitors or addDockerHost. It also explains the relationship to docker container monitors via docker_host, adding useful context.

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 when to use this tool by stating it returns docker daemon connections and that they are referenced by docker container monitors. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the context makes the use case clear given sibling tool names.

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