lexq_deploy_publishPublish a DRAFT version (DRAFT → ACTIVE). Locks the version from further edits. Must have at least one rule. Undefined facts referenced by rules do not block publishing (INV-4); call lexq_facts_unregistered first to review them.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| memo | Yes | Publish memo (required) | |
| groupId | Yes | Policy group ID | |
| versionId | Yes | Version ID to publish |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Input schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -falseInput schema / properties / groupId / patternAdded value: +"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"Input schema / properties / versionId / patternAdded value: +"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"Input schema / properties / memo / descriptionPrevious value: -"Publish Deployment memo (required)"New value: +"Publish memo (required)"Input schema / properties / memo / defaultRemoved value: -""Input schema / properties / memo / descriptionPrevious value: -"Deployment memo"New value: +"Publish Deployment memo (required)"Input schema / properties / memo / minLengthAdded value: +1Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "groupId",
- "versionId"
-]New value: +[
+ "groupId",
+ "versionId",
+ "memo"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Goes beyond the annotations by disclosing the state transition, that publishing locks the version from further edits, and the rule-count invariant. It does not describe auth requirements or failure behavior, but the key side effects are clearly stated.
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 sentences, all substantive: state transition, locking side effect, and prerequisite/caveat. The most important behavioral fact is front-loaded and no words are wasted.
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 enough for an agent to call correctly: it knows target state, locking consequence, the rule prerequisite, and the pre-check step. It does not explicitly describe the success response, but the absence of an output schema makes that a minor gap for a state-change 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?
Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, though it does provide surrounding invariants that affect when the call is valid.
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 ('Publish'), a specific resource (a DRAFT version), and the exact state transition (DRAFT → ACTIVE). The locking behavior further distinguishes it from sibling deploy/version tools without needing to infer from the schema.
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?
Provides clear prerequisites: at least one rule is required, and undefined facts do not block publishing. It explicitly directs the agent to call lexq_facts_unregistered first to review undefined facts, though it does not name alternative publish/deploy tools or state when they would be preferred.
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.