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

The annotations already declare the write, non-destructive, non-idempotent profile. The description adds real context beyond them: the last upload is reused, no code is transmitted, and the app restarts, which signals meaningful state impact. It omits downtime, any permission prerequisite, and what the call returns.

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?

Two short sentences, with the action and effect front-loaded and no wasted wording. It is appropriately sized for a single-parameter tool.

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 simple one-parameter mutation with annotations covering the safety profile, the description tells the agent almost everything needed. It could still say whether the call waits for the restart and whether staged changes must be set first via set_env.

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 schema has one parameter fully described and a validation pattern. The description adds nothing about project_id semantics, so the documented baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific action and resource: re-running the current version of a DenkOps project. The phrase 'Reuses the last upload; no code is sent' implicitly separates it from deploy and rollback, but it never names those siblings, so an agent must infer the distinction.

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?

It gives concrete conditions for use: apply staged env or path changes, or restart the app. No explicit when-not guidance or named alternatives appear, so choosing redeploy over deploy is left to inference.

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