ssh_docker_inspect

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation ('Inspect') but doesn't explicitly state it's non-destructive, what happens if the container doesn't exist, or whether an active SSH session is required. The description is adequate but lacks important behavioral details.

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 extremely concise: one sentence and a two-line arg list. It is front-loaded with the purpose and wastes no 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 the tool has an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. However, it could mention that the output is a JSON object with configuration and state. The description is complete enough for a simple tool but lacks context for differentiating from siblings.

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 adds basic meaning to parameters: 'container' is a name or ID, 'session_name' is the SSH session. However, it doesn't specify format expectations, that 'container' is required (though schema does), or any constraints. With 0% schema coverage, the description provides minimal but useful context.

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 inspects a Docker container, providing detailed configuration and state. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ssh_docker_ps (list), ssh_docker_stats (resource usage), and ssh_docker_logs (logs), which have different purposes.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or when to choose inspect over other Docker tools like ps or stats.

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