clone_container

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Clone a container' without explaining consequences like independence of clones, effect on source, permissions needed, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the operation's impact.

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: a single-purpose opening line followed by a bullet list of arguments. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the format is easy to scan.

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?

With 10 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema that goes unmentioned, the description fails to cover critical aspects like return values, error conditions, or cloning behavior (e.g., whether linked clones are supported). It is not complete enough for reliable tool use.

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, so the description's brief explanations for each parameter (e.g., 'source node name', 'ID for the new container') add necessary meaning beyond parameter names. However, the explanations are minimal and lack details like allowed values or formatting.

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 starts with 'Clone a container,' which clearly states the verb and resource. It is specific to container cloning and distinct from sibling tools like clone_vm, though it does not explicitly differentiate from similar operations.

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 migrate_container or convert_container_to_template. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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