container_list_tool

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states 'List containers' without revealing that it defaults to running containers only, that it accepts filters, or any potential side effects (though listing is inherently read-only). This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's temper.

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 extremely short and gets to the point, which is concise. However, it is under-specified for a tool with three parameters and an output schema; it provides no structural guidance or context beyond a minimal sentence. This balances out to an average score.

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's complexity (three optional parameters, output schema, no annotations), the description is highly incomplete. It omits key behavioral defaults like 'shows only running containers by default' and fails to explain how filters or limits affect results. The agent would need to rely entirely on the schema, which is not ideal.

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 description coverage is 100%, as all three parameters (limit, filters, all_containers) have descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'List containers' clearly identifies the action (list) and the resource (containers), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like image_list_tool or pod_list_tool. However, it does not specify whether it lists all containers or just running ones, which the schema later clarifies, so it is not fully unambiguous.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives like container_inspect_tool or other list tools. The description does not mention filtering, limiting, or the 'all_containers' option, and there is no context about typical use cases.

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