create_container

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions the unprivileged default, which is already visible in the schema, and says nothing about side effects, permissions, start behavior, or reversibility. This is a significant gap for a mutating create operation.

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 very brief and front-loaded with the core purpose, which is good. However, the second sentence duplicates schema information and the entire text is under-specified for a tool with 21 parameters, so it does not fully earn its place.

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 complex creation tool with 21 parameters, 2 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is far from complete. An agent cannot determine required arguments, default networking/storage behavior, or post-creation actions from the text alone.

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 description coverage is 0% and there are 21 parameters. The description does not explain the required 'node' and 'ostemplate' parameters, nor common options like 'rootfs', 'net0', or 'start'. It merely restates the 'unprivileged' default from the schema, adding no parameter-level value.

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 uses a specific verb ('Create') and identifies the resource ('new LXC container'), clearly distinguishing it from VM creation tools like create_vm. 'Default unprivileged=True' adds a relevant detail. Purpose is unmistakable.

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 like create_vm, clone_container, or template_container. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or typical use cases, leaving the agent without decision support.

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