Self-host the gateway

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by mentioning the returned Docker command and run modes, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations indicate, which is acceptable.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action ('Returns the copy-paste Docker command'), and the second sentence provides usage context. Every sentence is necessary and concise.

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 zero-parameter tool with an output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns and when to use it. No additional information is needed given the tool's simplicity.

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?

There are no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100%. The description mentions 'Takes no arguments', which is consistent but does not add meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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 that the tool returns a Docker command for self-hosting the gateway, with specific mention of available run modes. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like comind.about (info) and comind.config (configuration) by focusing on deployment.

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 explicitly says 'Call this when you want to deploy or evaluate the full gateway', providing clear context for when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use, though the sibling tools cover other use cases.

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