Deploy Agency Node/Static Site

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the operation flow (uploads archive, triggers build, deploys to public_html) and the synchronous behavior (site is live when tool returns). Does not mention overwrite behavior or permissions, which could be a gap, but it provides meaningful process transparency beyond a simple 'deploy' statement.

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?

Two sentences, first stating purpose and steps, second stating synchronous behavior. Information is front-loaded with no filler, every sentence earns its place.

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 the simple parameter schema (2 strings, no output schema) and no annotations, the description covers purpose, process, and a key behavioral trait (synchronous). It could be more explicit about whether the deploy overwrites existing content or any prerequisites, but for a straightforward deploy tool, it is adequately complete.

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 baseline is 3. Both parameters have brief descriptions ('Website UID' and 'Relative path to archive from document root'). The tool description adds no extra detail about parameter format or constraints beyond what the schema already provides, so it does not exceed the baseline.

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?

Description uses a specific verb 'Deploy' with a specific resource 'node-static Agency Plan website' and method 'from an archive'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like agency_deploy_php and hosting_deploy_static by scoping to Agency Plan and node-static site type.

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?

Provides clear context (Agency Plan, archive-based, synchronous) that implies when this tool is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is sufficient for an agent to differentiate from similar deploy tools.

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