Start service

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the approval waiting behavior and one-time token resume, which is valuable. However, it doesn't mention permissions, side effects, or prerequisites for a 'resolved' deployment, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 that are direct and front-loaded with the core action. No wasted words; it efficiently conveys the primary behavior and the approval nuance.

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?

With 9 optional-looking parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient for an agent to know which parameters are required to identify the deployment and how approval actually works in practice. The term 'resolved deployment' is ambiguous without referencing a prior resolution step or parameter.

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?

The input schema has 9 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description does not map any of them to their roles. It only vaguely references 'approval' and 'one-time token', which could relate to approval_token and approval_wait_seconds, but does not explicitly explain any parameter.

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 ('Start') and the target ('one resolved deployment'), which is specific and distinguishable from sibling tools like stop_service and restart_service. It also adds the nuance of 'resolved', implying a specific deployment already identified.

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 starting a service and provides context about approval handling, but it does not explicitly compare with alternatives like restart_service or preview_service_execution, nor does it state when not to use this tool. The approval guidance is useful but not a full usage guideline.

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