Update single container

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

Annotations provide basic safety hints (non-destructive, non-readonly) but description adds no extra behavioral details such as whether the container restarts, preserves data, or requires specific permissions. For a mutation tool, more context is expected.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with action and target. No wasteful words. Efficient and clear.

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?

For a simple two-parameter update action without output schema, the description covers the essential purpose. However, minor omissions like potential side effects (downtime) or link to bulk update options reduce completeness slightly.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description does not add any additional meaning, format, or constraints beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Update a single container to the latest image version' clearly states the verb (update), resource (container), and scope (single container to latest image). It distinguishes from siblings like 'arcane_container_update' which may update other container properties.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'arcane_container_update' or 'arcane_updater_run'. The description lacks context for when to select this specific updater operation.

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