docker_list_scenarios

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

Without annotations, the description fully relies on itself. It states it lists scenarios and returns names and paths, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly confirm no side effects or disclose any behavioral details beyond that.

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?

Two concise sentences with no extraneous information. The first sentence states the purpose, the second describes the output. Every word earns 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?

Given the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description adequately covers what the tool does and returns. It could provide more context about where scenarios come from or if any environment setup is needed, but it is sufficient for a simple listing tool.

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?

No parameters exist, so the description adds value by explaining the return structure (names and file paths). Baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description meets this.

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 tool lists all available Docker deployment scenarios and specifies what is returned (scenario names and docker-compose file paths). The verb 'list' and resource 'Docker deployment scenarios' are specific and distinguishable from sibling tools like docker_deploy_scenario.

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, such as before deploying a scenario or to check available scenarios. There is no mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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