Demox MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that the system '会自动上传到云存储并部署', which implies automation and cloud storage usage, but fails to disclose critical traits like whether this is a destructive operation (e.g., overwriting existing sites), authentication requirements, rate limits, or error handling. This leaves significant gaps for a deployment tool.

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 highly concise and front-loaded, consisting of two sentences that efficiently convey the core purpose and key constraint. Every sentence earns its place by stating the action, target, and input format without unnecessary details.

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 complexity of a deployment tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information on behavioral traits (e.g., destructive nature, auth needs), output format, error conditions, or integration with sibling tools. This is inadequate for guiding an AI agent in a production environment.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning '仅支持 ZIP 文件或目录', which aligns with the zipFile parameter's description but doesn't provide additional syntax or format details. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 the specific action ('部署' meaning deploy) and resource ('静态网站到 Demox 平台'), specifying the deployment target. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on deployment rather than deletion (delete_website), retrieval (get_website), or listing (list_websites). The mention of '仅支持 ZIP 文件或目录' adds specificity about input formats.

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 implies usage context by stating '仅支持 ZIP 文件或目录', which suggests when to use this tool (for static website deployment with those formats) and indirectly when not to use it (for other file types). However, it lacks explicit guidance on alternatives or prerequisites, such as comparing to sibling tools or mentioning authentication needs.

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