Docker Containers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden; 'list' implies a read-only operation, which is useful. However, it does not disclose whether stopped containers are included by default, what filtering semantics are supported, or any Docker daemon/access requirements. The presence of an output schema covers return shape but not behavior.

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 phrase with no wasted words, making it easy to scan. It is concise but somewhat vague; 'filtering' is not elaborated, so it stops short of an excellent structure.

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 tool that advertises filtering, the description leaves the filter contract completely unspecified, and no annotations fill that gap. The output schema may document the response, but an agent cannot know what params to pass to achieve a desired filtered list. The low parameter schema coverage and absent usage guidance make this incomplete.

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 description coverage is 0% and the single 'params' object has no property documentation. The description's 'with filtering' hints that params carries filter criteria, but it does not specify accepted keys, value formats, or how filtering maps to the Docker API. This is insufficient compensation for the missing schema descriptions.

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 containers with filtering' states a clear verb and resource, and the Docker context is reinforced by the tool name and title. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like docker_logs or docker_stats, though it does not explicitly name them. The lack of specificity about which container states are included keeps it from a 5.

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 given for when to use this tool versus alternatives such as docker_stats, docker_info, or docker_logs. The only usage hint is 'with filtering', which does not explain when filtering is needed or how to choose this tool among the many Docker-related siblings.

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