List Docker containers and their status on a local or remote homelab host, similar to 'docker ps'. Inspect container state read-only to monitor what is running.
List Docker containers with status (read-only, like 'docker ps')
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| host | No | Server name from HOMELAB_HOSTS (e.g. 'sil-baru'). Omit to run on the local machine. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It does disclose that the operation is read-only and analogous to 'docker ps', which is valuable. However, it omits details such as permissions needed, output format, or behavior when no containers exist.
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?
A single efficient sentence with no wasted words. The read-only hint is front-loaded and the analogy is compact.
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, fully documented parameter and no output schema, the description provides adequate context to invoke it correctly. It lacks usage guidance and richer return-value hints, but the core information is present.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the single 'host' parameter is already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, making the baseline of 3 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?
States a specific verb (list) and resource (Docker containers) plus what is included (status). The 'like docker ps' analogy makes the scope clear. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools such as docker_stats, which also concerns containers.
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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like docker_stats or docker_logs. The description only states what it does, not when an agent should choose it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.