container_inspect

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description aligns with this by describing a read-only inspect operation. It adds behavioral details like the contents of the returned data (config, state, networks, etc.), enhancing transparency without contradicting annotations.

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 concise with about 5 sentences in two paragraphs. It front-loads the purpose, then provides guidelines, and ends with parameter details. Every sentence adds value with no fluff.

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 simple tool (one required parameter, no output schema, clear annotations), the description covers all needs: purpose, usage context, parameter explanation, and return type. The reference to 'docker inspect' provides additional familiarity.

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 0% description coverage for the single parameter. The description compensates by explaining 'id_or_name - Container id (full or short) or name', adding meaning beyond the schema. It also describes the return type as a dict equivalent to docker inspect.

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 states 'Return the full inspect detail for a single container' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like container_list, container_logs, and container_stats, making its unique purpose clear.

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 'Use this when you need complete information about one container' and contrasts with alternatives for enumeration (container_list) and logs/stats (container_logs/container_stats), providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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