list_volumes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of signaling behavior. 'List all' clearly indicates a read-only, unfiltered enumeration, so there are no hidden destructive side effects. It does not mention output shape or daemon requirements, but those are minor for a zero-parameter list operation.

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 six-word sentence with no filler. The verb and resource are front-loaded, and every word earns its place.

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 no-parameter list tool, the description is largely complete: it names the action, scope, and resource. The only gap is that it does not hint at the return shape or fields, but that is generally inferable for a volume listing tool.

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 zero properties, so the baseline for parameter semantics is 4. There are no parameters for the description to explain, and the description correctly implies that the tool takes no arguments.

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 a specific verb ('list') and resource ('Docker volumes'), and the word 'all' clarifies scope. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_containers and list_images by naming the exact resource type.

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 use case is implied: use this when you want all Docker volumes. However, there is no explicit guidance about alternatives or when not to use it, such as comparing it to create_volume, remove_volume, or other list_* siblings.

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