ssh_docker_exec

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states execution inside a container, but does not disclose requirements (e.g., Docker must be installed, container must be running), permissions, side effects, or error cases. Minimal transparency beyond the obvious.

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 concise: one sentence followed by a parameter list. Every sentence adds value. No redundant or extraneous information. Front-loaded with the tool's purpose.

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's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description is largely complete. It could benefit from noting that the Docker container must already be running and that the session_name indicates the SSH session, but overall sufficient for an exec 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so description must add meaning. It does so by explaining each parameter in plain language (e.g., 'container: Container name or ID', 'command: Command to execute'). However, it could provide more detail (e.g., command format, validation rules).

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 'Execute a command inside a running Docker container,' specifying the action, resource, and context. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like ssh_execute (for commands on the host) and other Docker tools.

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?

Usage context is implied (inside a running Docker container), but no explicit guidance is given on when to choose this tool over alternatives like ssh_execute or when the container must already exist. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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