list_networks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation ('List') but does not explicitly state that the tool does not modify any resources, nor does it mention authentication, rate limits, or performance characteristics. For a tool with no annotations, more transparency is needed.

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 sentence of 12 words, front-loading the core purpose ('List Docker networks with optional filter') and including return fields. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately states the tool's function and output. It is complete enough for an agent to understand what the tool does, though additional behavioral transparency would improve completeness.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'filter', and the description repeats 'Filter by name or driver' which matches the schema. The description adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool lists Docker networks with an optional filter, and specifies the return fields (IDs, names, drivers, scopes). It uses a specific verb+resource ('List Docker networks') and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_containers, list_images, and list_volumes by naming the resource explicitly.

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?

The description mentions an optional filter but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any prerequisites. The resource name itself distinguishes it from siblings, but there is no when-not-to-use advice or context for choosing among list tools.

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