update_container

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose side effects, required permissions, or whether changes are destructive. It only states that it updates configuration, leaving the agent uninformed about behaviors beyond the basic action.

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, concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently communicates the purpose but could benefit from additional details without significant bloat.

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 severely incomplete. It does not specify what aspects of configuration can be updated, how to specify them, or what the outcome/response is. Given the low schema coverage and missing parameters for configuration values, the agent cannot use this tool effectively.

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 description does not explain any parameters despite zero schema description coverage. It names 'container_id' implicitly but provides no meaning for 'env_id' or 'agent_token'. The agent cannot infer what these parameters control from the description alone.

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 'Update' and the resource 'container's configuration' with context (e.g., after image or resource changes). It distinguishes from sibling tools that perform other operations on containers like commit, create, or stop.

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 explicit context for when to use the tool ('after image or resource changes'), which helps in selecting it over other container modification tools. However, it does not specify when not to use or mention alternatives.

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