start_app

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It at least conveys the primary effect of starting a service, but it does not mention idempotency, failure behavior if already running, prerequisites, permissions, or any 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 a single, short sentence that is easy to parse and front-loads the action. It is concise with no filler, though it achieves brevity at the expense of contextual detail.

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 state-changing tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is too sparse. It does not explain the lifecycle context, what happens after invocation, or how it relates to deploy_app and restart_app, leaving an agent to guess important semantics.

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 two parameters are already documented. The phrase 'app service' weakly implies that serviceName refers to a service within a project, but the description adds little meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Start') and resource ('an app service'), so an agent can infer the tool's basic function. It is distinct at a surface level from siblings like stop_app and restart_app, though it does not explicitly separate starting from deploying.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use start_app versus deploy_app, restart_app, or stop_app. The description does not state whether the service must already exist, whether it should be used after a failed deploy, or what conditions make this tool the correct choice.

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