get_docker_status

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

No annotations are provided, placing full burden on description. It discloses what data is returned: version, containers, disk usage. However, it does not mention authorization needs, error conditions (e.g., Docker not running), or side effects. The description adds meaningful content beyond the name but lacks some behavioral detail.

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 sentence that efficiently lists the key outputs. Every word adds value, no redundancy.

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 zero parameters and presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns. It is complete for this simple tool.

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 schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds no parameter semantics but none are needed. With no parameters, baseline is 4.

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 the tool retrieves Docker status including version, containers list with specific fields (name, state, ports, image), and disk usage. It distinctly differentiates from sibling tools that focus on other system components.

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 scope is clear: it is for getting Docker status. While no explicit when-not-to-use is given, the sibling tools make it obvious this is for Docker-specific information. No alternatives are mentioned, but it is uniquely Docker-related.

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