docker_inspect

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

With no annotations, the description partially discloses behavior related to execution timing and timeout handling. However, it fails to indicate whether the tool is read-only, its output structure, or prerequisites (e.g., Docker running). The behavioral disclosure is limited to a specific sub-aspect.

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 a single paragraph but does not front-load key information (purpose). It contains redundant phrasing ('Kali Agent MCP tool: docker_inspect') and could be more concise. It earns a 3 for being minimally acceptable but not efficient.

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 tool has 6 parameters and an output schema, the description lacks completeness: it does not explain the main action, the required 'target' parameter, or the return value. The description covers only the timeout behavior, leaving major gaps for appropriate invocation.

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 adds meaning to the timeout-related parameters (expected_runtime_seconds, on_timeout, etc.) by explaining their use cases. However, the required 'target' parameter is completely unexplained, and with 0% schema coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 does not explicitly state what docker_inspect does; it only repeats the name and discusses execution timing. The purpose is vaguely implied by the tool name but is not clarified, leaving the agent unsure of the tool's core function.

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 docker_inspect versus its siblings (e.g., docker_logs, docker_ps). The description focuses solely on timeout parameters, not on the tool's selection context.

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