codix.deploy.guide

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

With no annotations provided, the description is the sole source of behavioral info. It states it generates steps, implying a read-only guide, but does not specify output format, side effects, or any prerequisites. It could benefit from noting that it produces instructions rather than executing deployment.

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?

Description is a single sentence with no filler. Every element—verb and target list—contributes meaningful content, and it is front-loaded with the action.

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's simple two-parameter schema and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and target options. However, it omits the 'stack' parameter and any detail about the returned steps or when to use this tool, leaving moderate gaps for an agent.

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 descriptions are absent (0% coverage). The description lists all target enum values ('cPanel, VPS, Docker, ...'), which adds some semantic context for 'target', but it does not address the 'stack' parameter at all, leaving its meaning (e.g., laravel-livewire vs static) unexplained.

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 uses a specific verb 'Generate' and clearly identifies the resource ('deployment steps') plus enumerates supported targets (cPanel, VPS, Docker, etc.), making it distinct from sibling tools like docs.generate or api.generate.

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 a clear function but does not give explicit 'when to use' guidance or contrast with alternatives. It implies usage for generating deployment instructions but lacks exclusions or scenarios.

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