build_image

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

Without annotations, the description reveals the tool creates an image and returns a confirmation with build time. Does not discuss potential side effects like overwriting existing images or required permissions, but provides sufficient behavioral context for a build action.

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?

Very concise: two brief paragraphs. Purpose stated first, then parameter descriptions with examples, and return value. No extraneous content.

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?

Covers purpose, parameters, and return value. With an output schema implied by 'Returns: Confirmation with build time', the description is fairly complete. Lacks error handling or prerequisites, but acceptable for a straightforward build 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description explains both parameters (name and containerfile) with examples and usage details, adding significant meaning beyond the schema's type-only definition.

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?

Clearly states the tool builds a container image from a Containerfile, specifies Dockerfile syntax, and mentions downstream usage with restore or as default image. Distinguishes from siblings like 'images' and 'restore'.

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?

Provides context on when to use (to create custom images for restore) but does not explicitly state when not to use or contrast with alternatives like 'clone' or 'snapshot'. Lacks explicit exclusion criteria.

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