Docker System Df

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the topic ('Docker disk usage') and fails to mention whether the operation is read-only, what output format to expect, or any performance or permission implications. This is a critical gap for a tool with no annotation support.

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 brief (a single noun phrase), which might seem concise, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It lacks any structure that front-loads an action or key details, and the brevity is harmful because it omits essential information.

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 having an output schema (not shown), the description is completely inadequate for an agent to understand the tool's function, parameters, or how it differs from siblings like docker_stats or docker_info. With many related tools and a vague purpose, this definition leaves the agent without enough context to use the tool correctly.

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 only parameter 'params' is a generic object with additionalProperties: true and no defined properties. The description gives no explanation of its purpose, possible values, or examples, and the schema coverage is 0%. The agent receives zero guidance on how to use the parameter, making correct invocation impossible.

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 'Использование диска Docker' translates to 'Docker disk usage'. It is a noun phrase that essentially restates the tool name without specifying an action (e.g., 'List' or 'Show') or the exact scope (e.g., breakdown by images, containers, volumes). It provides minimal differentiation from sibling tools like docker_stats or docker_info.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction on tool selection among the many Docker and system monitoring siblings.

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