container_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It indicates a read operation ('Get') but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., whether repeated calls impose overhead), required permissions, or limitations (e.g., container must be running). The single sentence is insufficient for behavioral context.

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, focused sentence with no extraneous words. It front-loads the key purpose and metrics, achieving maximum conciseness without sacrificing clarity.

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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate but minimally complete. It covers the basic purpose and parameter, but lacks information about the return value format, usage context, or constraints (e.g., container must be running).

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema's parameter description ('Container ID or name'); it repeats the same information. No format hints or examples are provided.

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 clearly states the action 'Get real-time resource usage statistics' and identifies the resource as 'a Docker container', specifying metrics (CPU, memory, network, I/O). This verb+resource combination is distinct from sibling tools like inspect_container or list_containers, making the purpose 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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., inspect_container for configuration, stream_logs for logs). The description lacks context about typical use cases or prerequisites, leaving the agent without decision support.

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