deploy_git_repo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'trigger deployment' which implies a mutation, but it does not disclose what happens during deployment, whether the repo must already exist, whether it is asynchronous, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a deployment action.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential purpose and trigger mechanism without any redundancy or filler.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description and schema provide adequate context for basic understanding. However, it could mention the expected outcome or prerequisite that a .cpanel.yml file must exist, so it is not fully complete.

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 provides 100% coverage with a description for repository_root ('Repository path to deploy'). The tool description adds the .cpanel.yml context but does not clarify whether the path is local or remote, or what format is expected. This aligns with the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Deploy'), resource ('Git repository'), and mechanism ('trigger deployment via .cpanel.yml'). This distinguishes it from sibling operations like create_git_repo, update_git_repo, and get_git_deployment_status.

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 by mentioning the deployment trigger via .cpanel.yml, which contrasts with update/delete/status operations. However, it does not explicitly state exclusions or when to prefer alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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