createAppDeployTrigger a new app deployment by providing workspace, app slug, environment, region, and optional commit details like SHA, author, and message.
Trigger a new deployment for an app
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| env | No | ||
| region | No | ||
| appSlug | Yes | ||
| requestBody | No | The JSON request body. | |
| workspaceSlug | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, which already communicate that this is a mutating action. The description does not add further context about potential side effects, such as triggering a new deployment version or affecting current app state, but it does not contradict the annotations either.
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, clear sentence with no fluff. It is concise and well-structured, delivering the essential purpose without unnecessary detail.
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?
There is no output schema or description of the response format, success/failure behavior, or side effects. The tool involves nested objects and multiple parameters, yet the description provides minimal context beyond the basic action, making it incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's 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?
Only the requestBody parameter has a description ('The JSON request body.'), and it is generic. workspaceSlug, appSlug, env, and region lack any explanation, leaving the agent to guess their meanings and allowed values despite the env enum. Schema coverage is only 20%, and the description does not compensate.
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 'Trigger a new deployment for an app' clearly states the action (trigger) and resource (deployment for an app), distinguishing it from related tools like deployApp and redeployApp. It lacks some specificity about the deployment context, but the core purpose is unambiguous.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like deployApp, redeployApp, or rollbackDeploy. No conditions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate use case.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.