container_prune

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

Given that annotations already indicate destruction and non-read-only behavior, the description adds valuable safety context: only stopped containers are removed, running containers are never affected. It also documents filter behavior and return format, going 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?

Every sentence adds value: purpose, safety, preview, filter details, alternative, args, and returns are all clearly laid out without redundancy. The structure is front-loaded and easily scannable.

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?

The description is fully self-contained for a tool with a single loosely-specified parameter. It covers usage, scope, return values, and alternatives, making it suitable for immediate invocation without prior knowledge.

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 schema only defines 'filters' as an object with no description. The description compensates fully by explaining how to use filters, listing valid keys (`until`, `label`), providing examples, and noting that omitting filters removes all stopped containers.

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 opens with a clear, specific verb and resource: 'Remove all stopped containers to reclaim disk space.' It distinguishes itself from sibling prune commands by targeting only stopped containers, and it explicitly notes that running containers are never affected.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use the tool, including a preview step via `container_list(all=True)` and an alternative for broader cleanup via the `prune_managed` prompt. This clearly sets expectations and gives alternatives.

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