dpanel_image_listLists all Docker images in a DPanel environment. Use it to check available images before creating containers or managing deployments.
镜像列表。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.11.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. The verb 'list' implies a read-only operation, which gives some minimal transparency, but the definition says nothing about permissions, pagination, scope, 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 a single short fragment, which is concise but severely under-specified rather than appropriately sized. It is front-loaded only in the sense that it is the entire description; no useful structure or additional context is provided.
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 low complexity (zero parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. However, the total absence of annotations means the agent receives no behavioral or usage context, leaving the definition only minimally adequate.
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 tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to document. Per the rubric, a zero-parameter tool receives a baseline of 4 for this dimension.
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 '镜像列表。' translates directly to 'Image list.', which merely restates the tool name and title. While it identifies the resource and an implicit list operation, it does not differentiate this tool from sibling image tools such as dpanel_image_detail or dpanel_image_tag_search.
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 guidance on when or why to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it lists images without filtering, nor when an agent should choose it over dpanel_image_detail or other image-related tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.