cargoshipper-mcp

by scarr7981

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

docker_list_containers

List Docker containers with option to include stopped containers and apply filters.

Instructions

List Docker containers

Args: all_containers: Include stopped containers (default: True) filters: Optional filters {"key": "value"}

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "docker_list_containers"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`all_containers`	No
`filters`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0May 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond listing. It does not mention default behavior (e.g., all_containers default is True, so it includes stopped containers) or any side effects.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is minimal and front-loaded with the purpose. Two concise lines for parameters, no redundant information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essentials. It could mention default listing behavior (all vs. running), but overall adequate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning for both parameters: 'Include stopped containers (default: True)' and 'Optional filters {"key": "value"}'. This compensates for the lack of schema descriptions, though filter format could be more explicit.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'List Docker containers' is a specific verb+resource pair. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like docker_get_logs, docker_list_images, etc., as listing containers is a distinct operation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description only outlines parameters, not when to use this tool over alternatives. No guidance on context, exclusions, or when not to use it.

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