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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint: true. The description adds that it runs a deployment script and returns a created deployment, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like irreversibility, impact on current state, or runtime duration.

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 one compact sentence plus an API reference. It starts with a warning emoji, is front-loaded, and contains no fluff.

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 destructive tool with three ID parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return value, and the API endpoint. It is mostly complete, though could mention potential asynchronous behavior.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions like 'Site id.' The description mentions the endpoint path but adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score 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 clearly states the action: 'Triggers a new deployment of the site (runs the deployment script).' It uses specific verbs and resources, and the sibling tools are mostly read-only or different operations, making this tool distinct.

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 implies when to use this tool (to trigger a deployment) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives. Given the sibling list includes many read tools, the agent can infer, but no explicit guidance is given.

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