compose_build

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only repeats the basic operation; it does not mention side effects like creating images, fetching dependencies, or cache behavior, nor does it say what happens on failure or what output is produced.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core action, with no wasted words. However, it is so brief that it provides less functional context than would be ideal, preventing a top score.

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?

Given five optional parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and no usage guidance, this minimal description is insufficient for reliable tool selection. It omits defaults, alternate-sibling relationships, and behavioral outcomes, making it a borderline minimal-fixture rather than a complete definition.

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 100%, and every parameter has a meaningful description in the schema, so the tool description need not repeat them. The description adds no parameter semantics, but the schema carries the load, justifying the baseline score.

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 ('Build') and resource ('Docker Compose services'), making it clear the action is to build images for Compose-defined services. It does not explicitly name sibling tools like compose_up or build_image, but the Compose qualifier helps distinguish it from single-image builds.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as compose_up or build_image. An agent cannot tell whether this tool only builds images without starting services or when compose_up might be more appropriate.

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