cli_docker_up

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It successfully discloses the detached/background execution behavior and implies no log output is returned. However, lacks details on error handling, idempotency, or side effects when services already 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?

Two sentences with zero waste. First sentence establishes purpose and execution mode; second provides essential workflow guidance. Every word earns its place with no redundant explanations.

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?

Appropriately complete for a 2-parameter Docker command with no output schema. Covers execution context (detached) and result inspection pathway. Could improve by mentioning success/error return behavior or prerequisite checks, but sufficient for the tool's complexity.

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%, documenting both projectPath and service parameters with clear examples. The description relies entirely on the schema for parameter semantics, earning the baseline score for complete schema coverage.

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?

Clear specific verb 'Start' with resource 'Docker services' and scope 'for a LaunchFrame project'. The mention of 'Use cli_docker_logs to inspect output afterward' effectively distinguishes from siblings like cli_docker_down or cli_docker_destroy by establishing the intended workflow.

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?

Provides explicit usage constraint ('Always runs detached') and clear alternative tool reference ('Use cli_docker_logs'). Implicitly guides against using for foreground/real-time output viewing, though it lacks explicit 'when not to use' exclusions.

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