list_containers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool lists running Docker containers on the local machine, but does not disclose prerequisites (Docker installed/running), performance characteristics, or what happens if no containers exist. The lack of behavioral details limits transparency.

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?

A single clear sentence with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the verb and resource. Ideal conciseness.

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 zero-parameter list tool with a provided output schema, the description is sufficient. It tells the agent exactly what it lists and where. Minor gap: could mention that it requires Docker to be operational, but overall complete for its simplicity.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter details. Schema coverage is 100% trivially. Baseline 4 as per instructions.

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 uses a specific verb ('List'), clearly identifies the resource ('running Docker containers'), and specifically scopes to 'the local machine'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'restart_container' or 'get_container_logs'.

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?

While the description implies the tool is for listing running containers, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., Docker CLI, or when to use 'list_resource_groups' for non-Docker context). However, the context of sibling MCP tools makes the purpose fairly clear.

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