supabase_functions_deploy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'deploy edge functions', which implies a write operation but does not explain side effects, idempotency, or error behavior. The transparency is insufficient for a deployment action.

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 a single, efficient sentence that covers the core purpose. No wasted words, but could be slightly more structured with key behavioral notes. Still earns a high score for brevity.

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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is somewhat complete. However, it lacks context about tool prerequisites, response details, and how it differs from similar tools. Adequate but with gaps.

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%: the parameter 'function_name' is fully described in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action (deploy), resource (edge functions), and method (using Supabase CLI). However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'deploy_edge_function', which may have a similar purpose. The specificity is good but lacks distinction.

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 like 'deploy_edge_function'. No mention of prerequisites such as requiring the CLI to be installed (check_cli_installed exists). The usage context is entirely implicit.

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