Generate Dockerfile

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

Annotations indicate idempotent (idempotentHint=true), non-destructive (destructiveHint=false), and modifying (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds context that the tool uses multi-stage builds for smaller production images, which is beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with action (Reads... generates...). Every sentence adds essential information.

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 generation tool without output schema, the description covers inputs (DESIGN.md or scan results), output (Dockerfile, optionally compose), and key feature (multi-stage). Missing details like format of output or idempotency behavior, but overall 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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, explaining all four parameters. The description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool reads DESIGN.md or uses sdd_scan_codebase results to detect tech stack and generates a Dockerfile (optionally docker-compose.yml). This distinguishes it from sibling generate tools like sdd_generate_devcontainer or sdd_generate_iac.

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 implies prerequisites (DESIGN.md or sdd_scan_codebase results) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusion criteria are provided, and the alternatives are not named.

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