container_rm_tool

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the burden of disclosing the destructive nature of the operation. It only says 'Remove a container' without stating that this permanently deletes the container, that running containers require force, or that associated volumes are only removed if explicitly requested. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 short sentence that conveys the core purpose with zero fluff. It is appropriately sized for a simple operation and every word earns its place.

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?

Despite having a clear schema, the description omits critical context about destructive side effects and does not explain when to use it among a wide set of sibling container tools. With no annotations and no alternative guidance, the tool description is insufficient for safe or effective usage.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for 'name', 'force', and 'volumes'. Therefore, the schema already documents the parameters effectively. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 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 phrase 'Remove a container' has a specific verb and resource, clearly stating the action. It aligns with the tool name and doesn't confuse with listing or inspecting, though it doesn't differentiate from other removal tools explicitly.

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 this tool versus alternatives like container_stop_tool or container_prune_tool. There is no mention of exclusions, preconditions, or cases where another tool would be more appropriate.

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