deploy_diagnose_url

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

With no annotations, the description transparently declares it is read-only, does not fetch bytes, purge cache, mutate state, or expose internal URLs. It mentions authentication via 'local apikey lookup' in the schema. However, it does not cover error conditions or rate limits.

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 with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the primary purpose, and the second succinctly lists negative behavioral traits. Every sentence earns its place.

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 5-parameter tool with no output schema, the description explains return elements (match status, diagnostic body, manifest/cache metadata, warnings, next steps) and explicitly states what it does not return. Minor gap: no mention of error responses or prerequisites beyond project_id.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by elaborating on parameter semantics: 'absolute HTTP(S) URL', 'lower-level hostname form without scheme/path/query', 'HTTP method to diagnose', and 'Project ID used for local apikey lookup'. This context exceeds the schema's basic type descriptions.

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 it provides read-only diagnostics for a Run402 public URL or host/path pair. The verb 'diagnose' matches the tool name, and it distinguishes itself by explicitly listing what it does not do (fetch bytes, purge cache, etc.), setting it apart from siblings like 'deploy' or 'purge' tools.

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 usage for checking whether the current release serves a URL, but does not explicitly state when to avoid using it or compare it directly to sibling 'diagnose_public_url'. There is no guidance on prerequisites or fallback options.

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