Test Docker Host

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral trait of not persisting the configuration and mentions that the success message includes the number of containers. However, it does not describe failure behavior or potential side effects like authentication or timeout, which would push it higher.

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 three concise sentences, each earning its place. It front-loads the core purpose, then provides output details, and finally usage guidance. No redundant or filler content.

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?

The tool is simple, with three well-documented parameters and an output schema available. The description covers purpose, non-persistence, success output, and usage context. It could be slightly more complete by noting failure behavior, but given the output schema, the description is largely sufficient.

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 has 100% description coverage for all three parameters, so the schema itself provides the necessary parameter semantics. The tool description adds little beyond the schema, only framing the overall purpose. This matches the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 tests connectivity to a docker daemon, uses the specific verb 'tests', and specifies the resource ('docker daemon'). It also distinguishes itself from addDockerHost by noting it does not persist the configuration.

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 explicitly says to use this tool before addDockerHost to avoid saving a broken configuration, providing clear when-to-use guidance and an alternative. The phrase 'without persisting it' also implies when not to use it (when persistence is desired).

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