agileconfig_publish_config

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

The description discloses a key behavioral effect: clients will receive real-time updates via WebSocket after publishing. However, it does not mention whether the operation is destructive, reversible, or requires specific permissions. It also omits details about how the env parameter affects behavior (schema covers this). With no annotations, more behavioral context would be helpful.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. First sentence states the action clearly, second adds a key behavioral effect. Every word 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?

Given no output schema and moderate complexity, the description covers the core purpose and an important side effect (WebSocket notification). It could be improved by mentioning what happens on success/failure, error cases, or clarifying the env behavior. But it is fairly complete for a straightforward publication tool.

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% (both parameters have descriptions). The description adds minimal value beyond schema: it mentions '某个应用' (a specific application) aligning with appId, but does not elaborate on env. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema already documents parameters well.

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 publishes all pending configuration changes for a specific application. It uses a specific verb ('发布', publish) and resource ('所有待发布配置变更', all pending config changes). This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'publish_single_config' which publishes only a single config.

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 tells when to use (when wanting to publish all pending changes for an app) but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. It does not mention that publishing a single config can be done with the sibling tool, nor does it clarify prerequisites (e.g., must have pending changes).

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