appcrane_deploy

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains the internal process (pulls latest commit, builds Docker image, swaps container) and return value (deployment ID). Could mention reversibility or failure handling, but overall transparent.

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?

Description is well-structured with a key action upfront, followed by details. Every sentence adds value, though slightly verbose. No wasted words, but could be slightly tighter.

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 no output schema, description explains return value and monitoring. Covers the process and parameter behavior. Sufficient for a two-parameter tool with moderate complexity.

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%, but description adds context: slug is the app identifier, stage defaults to sandbox and production requires confirmation. This goes beyond schema details, adding usage semantics.

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 it triggers a deployment to update an environment to the latest, with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like rollback or logs by focusing on deployment.

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?

Explicitly lists use cases ('update sandbox to the latest', 'deploy the newest version') and mentions alternatives (use appcrane_get_logs to monitor). Also notes default stage is sandbox and production requires user confirmation.

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