list_networks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. 'List all Docker networks' implies a read-only enumeration with no filtering or side effects, and the word 'all' indicates full-scope listing. However, it does not describe return format, pagination, permissions, or potential failure modes.

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, four-word sentence with no filler or redundancy. It front-loads the core action and resource, earning every word.

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 zero-parameter, simple listing operation, the description is mostly complete: an agent can infer what to call and why. It omits details about the returned data, but given no output schema exists and the tool is trivial to invoke, this is a minor gap.

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 parameters, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to elaborate. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for a parameter-free tool, and the description has nothing missing on this front.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('Docker networks'), making the tool's function immediately clear. It also distinguishes itself from siblings like list_containers, list_images, and remove_network by naming a distinct resource and operation.

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 intended use is implied by the verb 'List' and the resource 'networks', but there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over alternatives or when not to use it. It does not mention sibling tools such as create_network or remove_network, though the resource-specific naming makes confusion unlikely.

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