container_kill

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but description adds critical behavioral details: default SIGKILL, conflict error if container not running, and server containerization refusal. This goes beyond 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?

Very concise and well-structured: one paragraph for behavior, another for parameters and returns. Every sentence serves a purpose with no 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?

Given the tool's complexity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description covers all needed context: purpose, usage guidance, parameter details, return value (inspect payload), and edge cases.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description explains both parameters: id_or_name as container identifier, and signal as optional string with default SIGKILL and examples. It compensates for schema gaps.

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 it sends a signal to a running container, defaulting to SIGKILL for immediate termination. It distinguishes from container_stop and explains signal format, purpose, and behavior.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: for force-killing a container that ignores stop, or with a signal for config reloads (SIGHUP). It advises preferring container_stop for normal shutdown. Also mentions failure conditions (not running, server containerized).

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