hostodo_rollback_deployment

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

Given no annotations, the description fully discloses the stub nature: it does not perform the action and returns a coming_soon response. It also warns against sending secrets. This adds valuable behavioral context beyond the schema, though it doesn't detail what happens to input data.

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 extremely concise with two front-loaded sentences, no wasted words. It efficiently communicates the key points: purpose, stub status, and a security warning.

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?

As a stub tool with no output schema, the description mentions a 'structured coming_soon response' but does not describe its format or fields, leaving an agent uncertain how to handle the response. Given the tool's simplicity and optional parameters, additional guidance on the response would improve completeness.

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% with each parameter described in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond the schema, so the 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 clearly states the tool is for rolling back a prior deployment, using specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings as a stub, but the 'Coming soon' note indicates it's not functional yet, which is clear but may confuse agents expecting a working rollback.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only mentions it's a stub for demand recording and advises not to send secrets, but lacks context on when to prefer it over other deployment-related tools like hostodo_get_deployment.

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