Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
dockhand-readonly-mcp

dockhand-readonly-mcp

by cgfm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

List Docker environments

list_environments
Read-onlyIdempotent

List Docker environments with safe summaries, omitting sensitive connection details and credentials.

Instructions

Lists safe summaries of Docker environments known to Dockhand. Connection URLs and credentials are omitted.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_environments"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable security context by stating that connection URLs and credentials are omitted, which is a behavioral trait beyond the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two short sentences, front-loaded with the action 'Lists'. Every word earns its place, with no redundant information or filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter, read-only list tool, the description covers what it does and its key security behavior. Combined with the annotations, an agent has sufficient context to use it correctly without needing further output details.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema is empty (0 parameters), so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter details, and the security note about omitted credentials provides relevant context for understanding the output.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it lists Docker environments known to Dockhand, using a specific verb ('lists') and resource ('Docker environments'). The added detail about safe summaries (omitting credentials) further clarifies its scope and distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_containers or list_networks.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention sibling tools, exclusions, or specific conditions for use, leaving the agent to infer from the tool name alone.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools