Get App Deploy Status

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

No annotations are provided, shifting the burden to the description. The description merely restates the tool's purpose without disclosing behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, requires special permissions, or has side effects. For a tool with no annotations, this fails to add meaningful behavioral context beyond the name.

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 ultra-concise at one sentence with no wasted words. However, it is under-specified and lacks essential context. While brevity is maintained, the trade-off is insufficient completeness, preventing a higher score.

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 a simple input (1 param) and an output schema (context signals indicate its presence), which covers return values. However, the description does not explain the deployment status concept, how to interpret results, or typical usage scenarios. It meets the minimum for a simple tool but lacks explanatory depth.

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 input schema already describes the 'apps' parameter with a clear description and constraints (array of IDs, max 300), achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 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 'Get app deploy status from kintone' clearly specifies the action (Get), the resource (app deploy status), and the source (kintone). It distinguishes the tool from siblings such as kintone-deploy-app and kintone-get-app by focusing specifically on deployment status, avoiding ambiguity.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose is clear, it omits context such as prerequisites (e.g., deployment must have been initiated) or exclusions (e.g., not for checking app details). The usage is implied but not directly stated.

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