context_use

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false (modifies) and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by disclosing that the SDK client is not retargeted, which is a key behavioral trait beyond the 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 succinct with three clear sections: purpose+note, args, returns. Every sentence is necessary and adds value, with 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 one parameter, good annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior (CLI context change) and the SDK limitation, plus the return format. It could mention error handling (e.g., nonexistent context) but is largely complete.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description compensates by explaining that the 'name' parameter is an existing context name to set as default. This adds meaning beyond the schema's bare type definition.

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 sets the active Docker context for the CLI. It uses a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('Docker context'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like context_create, context_inspect, and context_list by focusing on activation.

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 provides clear context by noting that this tool does not affect SDK-backed clients and advises to restart the server for retargeting. It explains the parameter but does not explicitly list alternatives or when-not-to-use.

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