Update Docker Project

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 're-deploy', which hints at an action but fails to explain potential consequences like downtime, container recreation, or whether existing data is preserved. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 concise sentence with zero filler words. It effectively front-loads the core action and the '(re-deploy)' parenthetical, making it highly efficient.

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?

Despite having a fully described schema and no output schema, the lack of annotations places the responsibility on the description to explain the update process and side effects. The vague 're-deploy' does not adequately inform an agent about the operational impact, leaving the description incomplete for a mutation 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?

All three parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description itself adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, but the schema descriptions are clear enough (e.g., 'Updated compose YAML'), thus no deduction is needed.

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 provides a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('Docker project'), and the parenthetical '(re-deploy)' clarifies the action, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create/start/stop/restart. However, it does not explicitly state what is being updated (e.g., compose configuration), leaving some ambiguity that the schema partially resolves.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as vps_docker_create or vps_docker_restart. It lacks any context about prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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