delimit_deploy_verify

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'verify deployment health' without explaining what constitutes health, whether the tool makes changes, requires specific permissions, or has side effects.

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 extremely short (one noun phrase), which is concise but at the cost of omitting crucial details. It conveys purpose but not enough to be helpful.

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 lack of annotations and incomplete parameter documentation, the description is inadequate for the tool's complexity. It leaves many questions unanswered (e.g., what 'health' means, how to interpret results).

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 description coverage is 0%, and the tool description does not explain the three parameters (app, env, git_ref). The agent has no guidance on what values to provide or their purpose.

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 'verify deployment health' (specific verb+resource), but it doesn't differentiate from similar siblings like delimit_deploy_status or delimit_deploy_plan. The parenthetical '(experimental) (Pro)' adds context about maturity and access.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., delimit_deploy_status, delimit_deploy_plan). The description lacks any context about prerequisites or scenarios.

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