show_docker_reference

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

The description adds 'reference and cheatsheet' but does not specify output format or other behavioral traits beyond what the readOnlyHint annotation already provides. With annotations present, the bar is lower, but additional context about the return structure would improve transparency.

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 concise sentence of 4 words with no redundancy. It is appropriately front-loaded and contains 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?

For a simple, parameterless tool, the description is mostly complete. It indicates the tool returns a reference/cheatsheet. However, it could be improved by specifying whether the output is a list, formatted text, etc., especially since there is no output schema.

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 0 parameters, so the description does not need to provide parameter details. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description adds no confusion. It would be 5 if it explained the output format, but that is not required for parameters.

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 uses the verb 'Get' and specifies the resource as 'Docker commands reference and cheatsheet'. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like 'show_ansible_reference' by naming Docker specifically. This is a specific verb+resource combo.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., show_ansible_reference). No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned. The agent must infer usage solely from the tool name and description.

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