volume_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond annotations: volumes are addressed by name, the dangling filter finds unreferenced volumes, and managed_only filters on the docker-mcp-server.managed label. No contradiction exists.

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, then gives a concise usage note, filter example, parameter docs, and return shape. Each sentence earns its place; the text is compact and well-organized for an agent.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description explicitly states the return type and structure ('list - One volume document ({"Name", "Driver", "Mountpoint", ...}) per volume'). It covers filter semantics, managed_only behavior, and sibling tool relationships, making it complete for a list operation.

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 fully compensates. It documents each parameter: filters 'by attributes (e.g. dangling, name, label)' and managed_only 'Only return volumes created by this MCP server', plus an example filters={"dangling": True}. This adds real semantics beyond the schema.

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 'List volumes.', a specific verb+resource statement. It distinguishes from siblings by explaining that volumes are addressed by name for volume_inspect/volume_remove/volume_prune, making it clear this is the enumeration entry point.

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?

It gives clear context: lists volumes, and points to volume_inspect for detail and volume_remove/volume_prune for cleanup. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the alternative references provide practical guidance.

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