portainer_container_inspect

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

With no annotations provided, the description should disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature, permissions, or error handling. It merely states 'Get detailed information' and does not mention that it is a safe, read-only operation or any side effects.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no redundancy. The purpose is stated first, followed by parameter explanations. Every part earns its place.

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 the presence of an output schema, the description need not explain return values. However, it lacks context on error scenarios, default endpoint behavior, and that the operation is read-only. Still, it is minimally adequate for a simple inspect 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?

The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining container_id as 'Container ID or name' and endpoint_id as 'Target endpoint ID (uses default if omitted)'. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage, though more details about endpoint defaults could be added.

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 retrieves detailed information about a container, distinguishing it from siblings like container removal or listing. The verb 'Get' and resource 'detailed information about a container' are specific and 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as portainer_container_logs for logs or portainer_containers_list for container listing. It only lists arguments without any contextual usage hints.

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