docker_version

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

The description lists return keys and an example call, which is useful, but it does not explicitly disclose that this is a read-only command or what happens if Docker is not installed. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden, though the return keys imply command execution and error handling.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-line purpose, a return keys section, and an example call. Every sentence earns its place, and the format is easy to parse.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool, the description is sufficient for correct invocation. The presence of an output schema reduces the need for return-value details, and the example call clarifies usage, though it offers no contextual information about prerequisites or error scenarios.

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 and an empty schema, so there is no parameter information needed. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description appropriately adds no unnecessary parameter details.

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's function: returning the installed Docker version. This is a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes the tool from siblings like docker_info or docker_logs.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as docker_info. It simply states what it does without contextual cues or explicit exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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