Query Container Statistics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds the specific resource types (CPU, memory, network), which is useful. However, it does not disclose any other behavioral traits like pagination or time series format, but these are partially covered by the input schema parameters.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's action, target, and output scope. Every word earns its place with no wasted text.

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 absence of an output schema, the description does not explain the response format or specific time-series data structure. While annotations and schema cover safety and parameters, the lack of output information leaves an important gap for an agent to correctly interpret results.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, with all 5 parameters having descriptions. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It mentions time-series stats but no parameter details, so the schema carries the full burden.

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 it queries time-series statistics for a specific container and lists resource types (CPU, memory, network). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from its sibling tool 'query_system_stats', which likely provides system-level stats. The purpose is clear but lacks sibling distinction.

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 context (for a container's time-series stats), but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. It does not mention alternatives like 'query_system_stats' or 'list_containers'. The context signals and sibling list offer some clues, but the description itself is insufficient.

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