Dpanel Container Stat

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. Calling it 'statistics' implies a read-only operation, but the description never confirms read-only semantics, says whether it works on running vs stopped containers, or notes any permission requirements. It discloses almost nothing beyond the metric names.

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 short sentences with the purpose and the metric list front-loaded, and the parameter meaning appended. No wasted words; it is terse but appropriately so for a simple read tool.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the one parameter is explained. What remains missing is the routing information an agent needs to choose this tool over the near-identical dpanel_container_status/detail siblings.

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 coverage is 0% and the schema only types 'id' as a string. The description compensates by clarifying that id is the container ID, which is meaningful disambiguation (container vs compose vs image id) for a single-parameter tool, though it adds no format or lookup guidance.

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-resource pair — container resource statistics — and even enumerates the metrics returned (CPU/memory/network IO). However, it offers no differentiation from the very similarly named siblings dpanel_container_status and dpanel_container_detail, so an agent must guess which of the three returns live resource usage.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance at all and no mention of alternatives such as dpanel_container_status or dpanel_container_process. Usage must be inferred entirely from the name, which is risky given the overlapping sibling names.

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