docker/volumes

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

Beyond the annotations (which already declare read-only/idempotent/non-destructive), it discloses that the tool always runs as root, has no privileged argument, and is refused unless the grant has allowed: true. It also distinguishes its behavior from docker/prune (anonymous unused volumes only) and documents the empty-result and output-format behavior.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place: read-only scope, glob semantics, output formats, the prune distinction, sibling routing, and the root/grant requirement are all non-redundant and useful.

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?

With no output schema, the description still documents return values and the empty case, plus auth requirements and alternatives. Nothing an agent needs to call this tool correctly is missing.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the json output shape (an array of objects with name, driver, mountpoint, created, scope, labels, options, in_use_by) and the [] empty case, though the pattern glob is already documented in the schema.

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 (Lists) and resource (Docker volumes) plus exactly what is returned: driver, mountpoint, and mounting container names. An agent can immediately distinguish it from docker/containers, docker/images, and docker/networks.

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?

Explicitly routes to alternatives: the docker-volume://<name>/inspect resource for single-volume details, docker/containers for containers, and docker/prune target volumes for removal. It also clarifies the read-only boundary ('volumes are never created or removed here').

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