verify_deployment_xml

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the behavioral difference between preflight and postflight, which adds context. However, it does not disclose side effects (even whether it modifies anything), permissions, rate limits, or return behavior. 'Compare' implies read-only, but that is not explicit.

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, tightly worded sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and uses compact mode definitions that earn their place. Extremely efficient.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, yet the description does not explain what the tool returns or any prerequisites. While mode semantics are helpful, the description omits potential side effects, workflow context, and result interpretation. It is adequate but leaves gaps for a 4-parameter tool.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds behavioral meaning to the 'mode' parameter ('would it revert work' vs 'did it land'), which goes beyond the schema's simple 'before import' and 'after import'. Other params are already well-described in the schema.

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 verb+resource: 'Compare a deploy XML to the live server.' It further distinguishes itself by defining preflight and postflight modes, which clearly separates it from sibling tools like export_record_xml or query tools.

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 provides clear guidance for mode usage: 'preflight=would it revert work, postflight=did it land.' This implies when to use each mode (before vs after import). However, it does not name alternative tools or explicitly state when not to use this tool.

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