docker_compose_up

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that the tool 'changes server state,' implying destructive or mutation behavior, but it does not detail what actually happens (e.g., builds images, recreates containers, or just updates settings). It also does not mention whether it requires Docker Compose files to be present in a specific directory or if it could fail silently.

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 just two sentences and each sentence provides distinct value—the purpose and a behavioral trait. However, the second sentence ('This changes server state.') is somewhat redundant with the first and could be omitted or merged without loss of meaning.

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 tool has no parameters and an output schema is present, the description does not need to explain return values. However, it does not clarify key failure scenarios (e.g., missing docker-compose.yml), prerequisites (Docker installed, file present), or what 'update' means in terms of state changes. For a tool that modifies server state, this is incomplete.

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 input schema has 0 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so there is nothing to document. The description does not add any parameter details because none exist. With no parameters, the baseline is 4, and the description does not detract from this.

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 ('Start/update') and resource ('Docker Compose stack') with a clear behavioral modifier ('detached mode'). It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like docker_compose_restart and docker_compose_ps.

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?

The description says this 'changes server state,' implying it's a mutation tool, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like docker_start, docker_restart, or docker_compose_restart. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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