set_deployment_image

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that this is a write operation with medium risk, returns 'previous_image' for undo, and supports dry_run without recording. It does not detail side effects like pod restarts, but covers the key behavioral aspects.

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 concise: a brief header with risk marker, a few sentences, and a structured Args list. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage, parameters, return value, and preview behavior. Without an output schema, it clarifies the return value. It is largely complete for a deployment image update, though it could mention pod restart implications.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description compensates fully with an Args block explaining each of the 6 parameters (name, container, image, namespace, dry_run, target) and providing an example for image.

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 starts with '[WRITE][risk=medium]' and states 'Update a deployment container's image. Inverse: restore previous.' This clearly identifies the action (update) and resource (deployment container's image), distinguishing it from sibling tools like scale_deployment or delete_deployment.

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 indicates when to use this tool (to update an image) and mentions the dry_run option for preview. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternatives, but the sibling context makes the purpose clear.

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