start_stopped_containers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states it starts stopped containers, but does not disclose side effects, error conditions, idempotency, or permission requirements. For a mutation tool, this 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 sentence of 11 words, concise and front-loaded with the core action and resource. 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 no annotations, no output schema, and 2 undocumented parameters, the description is too brief. It lacks explanation of parameters, return values, prerequisites, and behavioral context. The agent cannot confidently use this tool without additional information.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention the parameters (env_id, agent_token) at all. It adds no meaning beyond the schema, leaving the agent without guidance on what these parameters represent or how to use them.

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 verb 'start', the resource 'containers that are currently stopped', and the scope 'for the given environment'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'start_all_containers' (starts all containers) and 'start_container' (starts a specific container).

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 implies when to use: when you want to start only stopped containers. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or suggest alternatives like 'start_all_containers' or 'start_container'. The context is reasonably clear but could be improved.

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