create_migration_preview

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is not a read-only operation. The description adds value by explaining what actually happens when called: it builds the migrated app on Staticbot's infrastructure. It also discloses a dual trigger-or-retrieve behavior, which is useful context beyond the annotations.

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?

Three sentences, no wasted words, with the core action front-loaded. Every sentence contributes: what the tool does, why it exists, and how the mode parameter behaves. The structure is clear and easily parseable.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values do not need to be explained. The description covers the trigger/retrieve distinction, the build purpose, and mode options, which is sufficient for a two-parameter tool. It could slightly improve by explicitly contrasting with get_migration_deployments, but nothing critical is missing.

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%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds meaningful extra semantics for 'mode' by defining what 'light' means (fast, single SOFTWARE job) and indicating the default behavior. This goes beyond the schema's minimal enum listing and helps agents choose a mode.

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?

States a specific action ('Trigger (or retrieve)') on a specific resource ('a preview deployment for a migration'), making the tool's role immediately clear. The mention of building the app on Staticbot's infrastructure further distinguishes it from generic deployment or migration tools. It reads unambiguously as the preview step before backend switchover.

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 places the tool in a clear workflow context: verify the migrated app works before finalising backend switchover. This implies the appropriate timing relative to sibling tools like choose_backend_switchover, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. The guidance is implied but strong enough for an agent to infer correct placement.

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