getAppDeprovisionExample

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

The description uses the verb 'Gets' indicating a read-only retrieval, which implies no side effects. However, it does not disclose return format, whether it is a static snippet, or any other behavioral specifics. With no annotations, the description carries the burden but adds only modest behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential purpose without any filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 simple no-parameter getter with an output schema available, the description sufficiently specifies what the tool returns (a GitHub Action example for deprovisioning an app). The output schema handles return details, and no additional context is needed for an agent to select and use this 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the input schema is empty. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description appropriately avoids nonexistent parameter details. It does not need to compensate for any schema gaps.

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 gets an example of a GitHub Action for deprovisioning an app. The verb 'gets' specifies the action, and the resource is precisely differentiated from sibling tools like getAppProvisionExample and getDatabaseDeprovisionExample.

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 provides clear context for when the tool is appropriate: when an agent needs an example GitHub Action for app deprovisioning. It does not explicitly rule out alternatives, but the purpose is specific enough that usage is evident. No explicit exclusions or alternate tool references are given.

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