Deploy Environment

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states that approval is always required, which is useful but insufficient. It does not describe whether the deployment is destructive, what permissions are needed, or any side effects, leaving significant gaps for a mutation operation.

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 concise with three sentences, each serving a purpose: defining the action, providing a prerequisite step, and noting a critical requirement. No extraneous words, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 that there is no output schema, the description does not explain what the tool returns, whether it is idempotent, or what happens after creation (e.g., success/failure). It only covers the approval requirement, which is helpful but leaves the agent underinformed about the overall behavior.

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?

The description does not mention any parameters explicitly. While it implies that environmentId refers to the environment ID (via the suggestion to use get-environments), revision and comment are completely unexplained. Since schema description coverage is 0%, more parameter guidance is needed.

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 tool creates a new deployment for an existing env0 environment, specifying the verb ('creates') and resource ('deployment for environment'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like abort, approve, or cancel, which serve different purposes.

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 advises using get-environments or get-environment to find the environment ID, providing a clear usage context. It also emphasizes that user approval is always required. However, it does not explicitly list when not to use this tool or mention alternative tools, which slightly reduces clarity.

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