Display all Docker images currently stored on the host.
List Docker images
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_images"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description only states the action without any behavioral details. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden but fails to disclose that this is a safe read operation, what side effects (none) exist, or any permission requirements. It lacks transparency beyond the bare minimum.
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 sentence with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded and earns its place without any padding. Perfect conciseness for a trivial 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?
Given the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description could be more informative by mentioning what the output contains (e.g., image names, tags). However, for a simple list operation, 'List Docker images' is minimally viable but lacks completeness that an agent might benefit from.
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 input schema has no parameters and 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level information because there are none. It does not provide any additional semantics that the schema does not already cover.
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 'List Docker images' clearly states the verb (list) and resource (Docker images), making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It distinguishes itself from siblings like docker_list_containers and docker_run_container by focusing specifically on images.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not mention that this is a read-only operation or that it lists all local images without filtering. Siblings like docker_pull_image or docker_run_container have different use cases, but the description offers no context for selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.