docker_images

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden; "List" implies read-only but that is never stated. It says nothing about which daemon is queried (local vs. the host parameter), what happens if the host is unreachable, or whether output is paginated, leaving the key behavioral questions unanswered.

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 line with no filler, well matched to a trivial list operation. It stops short of being under-specified to the point of being unhelpful structurally, though it leaves gaps elsewhere.

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, so the description needn't explain return values, and a one-line summary is defensible for a simple listing. However, with no annotations and an undocumented host parameter, the definition leaves the agent without enough to invoke it confidently against a remote daemon.

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 single host parameter has 0% schema description coverage and the description never mentions it, so the agent cannot tell whether it targets a remote Docker daemon or defaults to local. The listed fields (name, tag, size, age) describe the response, not the input, so they add no parameter meaning.

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?

"List images" states a specific verb and resource, and the enumerated fields (name, tag, size, age) confirm it is an inventory read, distinguishing it from siblings like docker_ps and docker_volumes. It does not explicitly call out those siblings, but the resource noun does the disambiguation work.

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?

Nothing says when to use this versus docker_ps, docker_disk_usage, or docker_inspect, nor any precondition such as needing a running daemon or a reachable host. The agent must infer usage 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.