start_container

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

The idempotentHint annotation already signals safe retries. The description adds the constraint that the container must be stopped, but it does not mention what happens if the container is already running, permissions required, or side effects. Given the annotation, this is acceptable but not rich.

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, focused sentence that conveys the essential operation without any fluff or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the simplicity of the tool.

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 simple start operation with one parameter and an idempotency annotation, the description is mostly adequate. However, the missing parameter format and lack of guidance on edge cases (e.g., already running) leave some gaps, making it minimally complete.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the 'container' parameter, and the description does not clarify whether it accepts a container ID, name, or both. Since the schema coverage is low, the description was expected to compensate but does not.

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 'Start a stopped container.' uses a specific verb ('start') and resource ('container') and further specifies the state ('stopped'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like stop_container, restart_container, and run_container. It unambiguously identifies the operation.

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 usage for starting containers that are currently stopped, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., run_container for new containers) or provide exclusions. The context is minimal, so it earns a mid-range score.

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