Container Stats Tool

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds nothing beyond that: it doesn't say whether stats are a one-shot snapshot or a stream, whether the container must be running, whether the call blocks, or what happens for a stopped container. For an observability tool with zero annotation coverage beyond safety, that is a meaningful gap.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is efficient, though the brevity edges toward under-specification rather than true conciseness.

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?

An output schema exists and the parameter is fully documented, so the agent knows the shape of the result. However, the description leaves real operational questions unanswered (snapshot vs. stream, running-container requirement), which matters for a live-stats-style 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 100% and the single `name` parameter is documented as "Container name or ID", so the schema carries the semantics. The description adds no extra meaning about identifier formats or defaulting, which is the expected baseline when the schema is complete.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Get container resource usage statistics"), which is clearly distinct from container_inspect_tool or container_logs_tool. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish itself from the nearby container_top_tool (process listing) or system_df_tool (disk usage), which an agent could plausibly confuse with 'resource usage'.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this instead of container_top_tool, container_inspect_tool, or system_df_tool, and no prerequisites or exclusions are named. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name.

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