podman_container_stats

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only and non-destructive, so the description does not need to repeat that. The description adds the behavioral trait of returning a snapshot rather than a stream, which is valuable beyond the annotations. However, it does not describe output format or any operational constraints.

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—a single sentence that is easy to parse and front-loads the core purpose. It omits additional useful detail, but it earns its place by being clear and compact.

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?

With a read-only annotation, a non-destructive hint, and an output schema available, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks essential parameter semantics and does not mention prerequisites like running containers, making it incomplete for a tool with two parameters and no schema descriptions.

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 provides no information about the 'all' and 'names' parameters, and schema description coverage is 0%. While the parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description does not clarify semantics such as whether 'all' includes stopped containers or how 'names' filters results, leaving the agent without sufficient guidance.

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 identifies the tool as retrieving container resource usage, with a specific qualifier of 'single snapshot, no streaming.' While it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'show', the meaning is unambiguous and differentiates from sibling tools like podman_container_top (process-level) and podman_ps (listing).

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 implies that this tool is for one-time snapshots rather than continuous monitoring ('single snapshot, no streaming'), but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusions. This is a thin but present usage hint.

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