docker_ps

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It fails to mention that the tool is read-only, requires a running Docker daemon, or what the output format is. Simply stating 'list' implies a read operation but is insufficient.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose. Every word earns its place with no wasted text.

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?

For a simple tool with one boolean parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks mention of output format (e.g., container IDs, names) and prerequisites (e.g., Docker daemon running). It does not fully prepare the agent for invoking the tool correctly.

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 covers the single parameter 'all' with full description (100% coverage). The tool description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it merely restates the concept of 'running' containers. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'List running Docker containers' uses a specific verb (List) and resource (running Docker containers), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like docker_logs (logs) and docker_stats (stats).

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 docker_logs or docker_stats. The description does not include context about prerequisites or intended use cases.

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