container_start

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and a usage hint, omitting details on idempotency, error behavior (e.g., if already running), permissions, or side effects.

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 exceptionally concise, using a single sentence to convey the purpose and a key usage instruction with no superfluous 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 simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the purpose and a usage hint. However, it lacks details on expected behavior (e.g., idempotency, error messages) that would make it fully informative for an agent.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100% vacuously. Per the baseline guideline for 0 parameters, a score of 4 is appropriate as the description adds no parameter information but no additional info is needed.

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 it starts the Kali Linux Docker container, a specific verb+resource. It also distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'container_status' and 'container_stop' by implying it is a prerequisite for running commands.

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 explicitly states 'Must be called before running any commands,' providing clear when-to-use context. However, it does not mention when not to use it (e.g., if container already running) or suggest alternatives like checking status first.

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