docker_stack_file

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It valuably discloses that secret values are hidden and the .env file is never shown, but it does not state read-only semantics explicitly, error behavior for missing stacks, or any host-related caveats.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the two most important behavioral caveats. No wasted words.

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 return-value explanation is not needed, and the redaction behavior is covered. However, the host parameter is entirely unexplained and there is no context on stack naming or error conditions, leaving a meaningful gap for a two-parameter 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for both parameters. It mentions 'stack' only implicitly and gives no meaning for the 'host' parameter or its default empty value.

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 ('Show the compose file of a stack'), clearly identifying the operation. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like docker_stack_config or docker_stack_write, so an agent must infer the difference from names.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb 'Show' and the resource, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus docker_stack_config, server_file_read, or docker_stack_write. No prerequisites or alternative routing are given.

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