context_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by explaining the CLI concept of contexts, how the server resolves them at startup, and the impact on subprocess vs. SDK tools. No contradictions with 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 (3 sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Each sentence adds value: the main action, the CLI context explanation, and the return structure. No wasted words.

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 no parameters, simple output, and good annotations, the description is fully complete. It explains the domain concept (contexts), the tool's behavior (listing), and the output fields. No gaps remain.

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 tool has no parameters (schema coverage 100%). The description adds meaning by specifying the return format: a list of dicts with fields like name, description, dockerEndpoint, and current. This clarifies what the agent can expect.

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 CLI contexts, with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Docker CLI contexts'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explaining the context concept and its relevance to this server. No ambiguity.

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 explains when to use this tool (to list contexts) and provides important context about how the server uses the current context and that changes affect only subprocess tools. It does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the guidance is clear and helpful.

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