update_deployment

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states 'updates configuration'. It does not disclose whether updates trigger a restart, are destructive or reversible, require specific permissions, or have any side effects. Important behavioral traits are missing.

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 very concise at one sentence. However, the brevity sacrifices important behavioral and contextual information, making it less effective for tool selection. It earns its place but could be expanded.

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 has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, side effects, or lifecycle implications (e.g., if an update triggers a redeployment). The agent lacks context to use the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for deployment_id, config, and tags. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents parameters adequately.

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 'Actualiza la configuración de un deployment existente' clearly states the verb 'update' and the resource 'configuration of an existing deployment'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'deploy_deployment' or 'create_deployment', though it does not elaborate on what 'configuration' entails.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., deploy_deployment, restart_deployment, or other update tools). There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use it, or contextual triggers.

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