deploy_api

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention side effects, authentication requirements, duration, or what happens upon deployment (e.g., success/failure response, whether it overwrites existing deployments). The description is minimal and does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the basic action.

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 concise sentence that is front-loaded and contains no fluff. However, it could be more informative without adding significant length. It earns a 4 for being efficient but not maximally helpful.

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, nested objects, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return value, error handling, or any post-deployment details. The complexity is not matched by the description's completeness.

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%, meaning the schema already documents all three parameters fully. The description adds no extra detail about parameter semantics, values, or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action: 'Deploy a generated API to a cloud platform with environment configuration'. It uses a specific verb ('Deploy'), specifies the resource ('generated API'), and includes the scope ('to a cloud platform with environment configuration'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools which focus on creation/generation rather than 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 implies usage after API generation by stating 'a generated API', but it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No when-not conditions or alternative tool references are provided. The context is adequate but not fully explicit.

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