redeploy_appRestart an existing app (rolling restart with zero downtime). Call this after changing configuration, or to recover an app that is stuck or misbehaving. It reruns the current build; it does not pull new code. If this app has storage, it is stopped and started again instead, so it is unreachable for a few seconds.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| app_id | Yes | The app id returned by list_apps |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond the annotations: rolling restart with zero downtime, and the critical storage caveat that the app is stopped and started instead, causing a few seconds of unreachability. This is valuable operational context the annotations do not convey.
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?
Three focused sentences with no wasted words: the purpose is front-loaded, usage guidance follows, and the important storage caveat is clearly stated. Every sentence 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?
Complete for a single-parameter, no-output-schema restart tool. The description covers what it does, when to call it, what it does not do, and the one significant behavioral exception (storage). No important calling context is missing.
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 the only parameter, app_id, is already clearly described as 'The app id returned by list_apps'. The description does not need to add parameter details, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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?
States a specific verb and resource: 'Restart an existing app', and adds the key distinction from deployment via 'It reruns the current build; it does not pull new code.' This clearly separates it from deploy_app and other siblings.
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?
Gives explicit when-to-use guidance: after changing configuration, or to recover an app that is stuck or misbehaving. It also implies when not to use it by stating it does not pull new code, though it does not explicitly name deploy_app as the alternative.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct operation: deployment, monitoring, scaling, configuration, or listing. There is no overlap; agents can easily select the correct tool.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., deploy_app, get_app_logs, resize_database). No naming irregularities.
12 tools cover the core operations of a deployment platform without bloat or missing essentials. The count is well-scoped.
Covers deploy, manage, scale, and monitor effectively. Missing only minor operations like deleting an app or environment variable, but the core workflow is complete.