list_services

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description need not restate safety. It adds the behavioral constraint that managed_only filters on the 'docker-mcp-server.managed' label. However, it does not disclose return format details or pagination, so it meets the baseline with minor added context.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and includes parameter explanations in a compact format. The 'args' and 'returns' lines are somewhat repetitive but not bloated. Could be slightly more concise by removing redundant formatting.

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 lack of output schema, the description provides a vague return type ('list of service attrs dicts') without specifying what attributes are included. For a complex tool with many siblings, more detail on return structure or typical usage would improve completeness.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by explaining the 'filters' parameter can filter by id, name, label, mode, and the 'managed_only' parameter filters on a specific label. This goes beyond the bare type definition but lacks detailed structure for the filter object.

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 'List swarm services' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_service' (singular) and 'list_containers' by specifying 'swarm'. The purpose is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_service' for a single service or 'stack_services' for compose deployments. There are no usage exclusions or context for selection.

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