remove_stack

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

The description explicitly states that the operation permanently removes containers, networks, and volumes with data deletion. This is strong disclosure of destructive behavior, compensating for the absence of annotations.

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: two sentences with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the main action and then clarifies the parameter. Every sentence adds value.

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 low complexity (1 parameter, output schema exists), the description covers the core functionality well. It could be improved by mentioning prerequisites (e.g., stack must exist) but is already adequate.

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 single parameter 'project_name' is described as 'unique name for this stack, used to group/manage its containers', adding meaningful context beyond the schema's title. This compensates for 0% schema description coverage.

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 verb 'Stops and permanently removes' and the resource 'compose stack', listing affected components (containers, networks, volumes). It is distinct from sibling tools like 'stop_stack' which only stops without removal.

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 'stop_stack' or 'deploy_stack'. There is no mention of prerequisites or situations where removal is inappropriate.

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