docker_eventsMonitor Docker events for containers, images, and networks to diagnose and observe infrastructure changes in real time.
Docker события (контейнеры, образы, сети)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| params | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry all behavioral disclosure. It does not mention read-only nature, output format, streaming behavior, or any side effects. The description only names the topic and gives no insight into how the tool behaves.
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 extremely short, which is concise, but it does not earn its place because it conveys almost no actionable information. There is no front-loading of key constraints or alternatives, and the sentence is a fragment rather than a clear statement.
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?
Despite an output schema existing, the description fails to explain what the tool returns or how to invoke it correctly. With a generic parameter and no behavioral context, the tool is effectively undocumented for an agent.
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 a single generic 'params' object with additionalProperties true and no description. Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain what parameters are expected. It does not, leaving the agent without any guidance on what to pass.
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 states the subject (Docker events) and hints at categories (containers, images, networks), but lacks a verb or explicit action. It does not say whether the tool lists, streams, or filters events. It is more informative than a pure tautology but still vague about the tool's core function.
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 versus alternatives like docker_logs or docker_stats. No context about typical use cases or exclusions is provided, leaving the agent to guess.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.