ck_deployment_advisor

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses behavior: analyze and dns_guide are read-only, generate_files is write operation (creates files), and dry_run previews without writing. Only minor missing details like file overwrite behavior.

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?

Well-structured with mode enumeration upfront, then mode details, then usage tips. Slightly long but each sentence adds value; no fluff.

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?

No output schema, so description hints at return types (recommendations, configs, instructions) but lacks detail on return format or structure. Adequate for agent but could be richer.

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 has 67% coverage but description compensates by explaining mode parameter values and dry_run behavior. Effectively 100% coverage with description adding significant meaning beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states the tool analyzes project stack and provides three distinct modes (analyze, generate_files, dns_guide) with specific actions, distinguishing it from siblings like ck_budget.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (before deploying or setting up CI/CD) and explicitly mentions alternative ck_budget for budget/cost checks, providing clear usage context.

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