get_docker_system_snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description disclosures essential behavioral traits: read-only via Docker API, per-part failures land in the errors field while the call still succeeds, and it is the heaviest Docker call. This goes beyond the bare minimum, though it does not cover potential pagination, rate limits, or authorization details, which would be valuable for an agent.

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 three sentences: a clear functional summary, a key behavioral caveat, and a usage recommendation. Each sentence adds distinct value with no redundancy or filler. It is appropriately front-loaded.

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 annotations, the description covers the tool's purpose, safety (read-only), failure semantics, and performance tradeoffs. Since an output schema exists, the description does not need to list return fields. It provides complete context for an agent to decide when and how to invoke it.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter meanings. Per the baseline for 0 params, a score of 4 is appropriate. The description appropriately mentions the errors field in the output, which indirectly hints at the output shape.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Returns a combined Docker snapshot') and enumerates its contents (containers, images, running stats, disk usage, networks). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling get_docker_* tools by framing itself as a combined/heavy snapshot, which is a distinct scope.

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 final sentence explicitly states when to prefer this tool: 'Heaviest Docker call - prefer narrower get_docker_* tools for a specific question.' This gives clear alternatives and a performance-based criterion for choosing this tool versus siblings.

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