Create service preview (image-backed)

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

Annotations already indicate this is not read-only (readOnlyHint=false) and not destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds that the preview uses base service settings unless overridden and specifies the API endpoint. However, it doesn't detail side effects, permissions, or idempotency beyond annotations.

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 two sentences plus a note, all concise and front-loaded with the primary action. No unnecessary words or repetition. Every sentence adds value.

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 creation tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers usage, constraints (image-backed only), and parameter details. It lacks explicit mention of what the response contains (e.g., preview ID), but references the Dashboard for viewing and the API endpoint, which is acceptable given the tool's simplicity.

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% and descriptions are thorough. The description adds context for imagePath (relative vs full URL), plan (legacy variants and restriction on free with paid base), and name (auto-generation). This goes beyond the schema's basic explanations.

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 creates a preview instance for image-backed services, and explicitly distinguishes it from Git-backed services by noting that previews cannot be created for those via the API. The verb 'create' and resource 'service preview (image-backed)' are specific and 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 clear context on when to use (for image-backed services) and when not (not for Git-backed services). It also mentions viewing previews in the Dashboard. Although it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools, the exclusion of Git-backed services is sufficient guidance.

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