podman_info

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds the specific data fields returned, which is useful context, but it does not disclose any subtle behaviors such as potential daemon requirements or performance implications. It is adequate but not rich.

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 one concise sentence, front-loaded with 'Podman host overview', and lists key aspects without unnecessary verbiage. Every word 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?

For a simple read-only info tool with an output schema available, the description covers the primary purpose and data scope. It omits any mention of the 'format' parameter, but the optional enum is self-explanatory. The presence of annotations and output schema reduces the need for more detail.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the 'format' parameter. The description does not mention this parameter at all, so the agent must infer its meaning solely from the enum values (text/json). Since the schema coverage is low, the description should have compensated, but it does not.

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 specifies a host-level overview tool, listing concrete data points (version, OS, runtime, rootless, resource usage). It distinguishes from sibling tools like podman_container_inspect and podman_images by focusing on the Podman host itself.

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool: when host-level information is needed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the host scope inherently separates it from container/image/pod tools. A note distinguishing it from podman_system_df would have earned a 5.

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