redeploy_website

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the risk is communicated. The description adds useful behavior beyond annotations: it explains that the operation redeploys the currently pinned template by default, that useLatest changes this behavior, and that a worker job ID is returned for polling. No contradiction with 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 compact sentences, with the core action first. Every sentence adds value: the default behavior, the version toggle, and the follow-up polling step. Nothing is redundant.

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 annotations, output schema, and full parameter schema coverage, the description is sufficient. It captures default behavior, the version option, and the post-call workflow. A minor gap is that it does not describe any side effects or prerequisites beyond the required id, but those are largely covered by the schema and destructive annotation.

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 the schema already documents id and useLatest fully. The description adds a little meaning by explaining the pinned-template default, which maps to useLatest, but it does not substantially clarify id beyond the schema's 'Deployment ID'.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Rebuild and redeploy the static website component.' It also distinguishes the operation from get_deployment by mentioning its job-tracking workflow and from rollback_website by the 'redeploy' and 'template version' language.

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?

It clearly explains when to set useLatest=true versus relying on the pinned default, and tells the agent to poll get_deployment for progress. It does not explicitly contrast with create_deployment or start_deployment, but the workflow guidance is strong enough for most use cases.

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