gatekeeper_start_container

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

The annotations already indicate a non-read-only mutation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds no behavioral context beyond that, such as what happens if the container is already running, whether it is reversible, or what side effects starting a container may have.

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, clear sentence with no redundant wording. It is appropriately short for a simple one-parameter action, though it is brief to the point of under-specification.

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 one-parameter mutation tool, 'Start a stopped container' is minimally adequate, but it lacks information about expected output, error behavior, and how it differs from the similarly named sibling 'start_container'. Given the large sibling list, more context would help disambiguate.

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 0%, so the description needed to clarify the 'name' parameter, but it does not explicitly state that 'name' is the container name. While inferable from context, the description does not add value beyond the schema's minimal 'Name' title.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Start a stopped container.' It clearly communicates the action, but it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling 'start_container', which appears to have the same purpose.

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 to choose this tool over alternatives like 'start_container', 'gatekeeper_restart_container', or 'gatekeeper_stop_container'. The phrase 'stopped container' implies a precondition, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given.

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