list_containers

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

The description discloses that filters are optional and lists return fields, but lacks details on default behavior (e.g., only running containers by default, as inferred from schema 'all=false'). No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden; it is partially transparent but incomplete on safety and defaults.

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, front-loaded sentence that effectively communicates the core function. It is concise but could include a brief note on default behavior without losing brevity.

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?

Given no output schema, the description lists return fields adequately. However, it omits details on pagination, output format, sorting, and the default scope (running containers). This leaves some gaps for a list 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% with descriptions for each parameter, so the description adds minimal value beyond mentioning 'state, label, name' as filters. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the description does not elaborate on parameter constraints or examples.

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 tool 'List Docker containers' with optional filters, which is a specific verb and resource. It also lists the return fields, making the purpose distinct from sibling tools like list_images or list_volumes.

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 such as compose_ps or inspect_container. The description does not mention prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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