deploy_diagnose_url

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

With no annotations, the description clearly declares the tool is 'read-only', and explicitly lists what it does not do: 'does not fetch bytes, purge cache, mutate deploy state, or expose internal CAS URLs.' This is strong transparency, though it lacks details on authentication requirements.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core purpose. Every sentence provides essential information without redundancy. Could be slightly more concise, but it is well-structured and easy to parse.

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 tool has 5 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns conceptually (match status, diagnostic body, metadata, warnings). It also covers behavioral limitations. This is sufficient for understanding the tool's capabilities and output.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant parameter details beyond the schema, but it does clarify the expected format (e.g., 'absolute HTTP(S) public URL') and mutual exclusivity of url and host/path. This is adequate but not exceptional.

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 performs 'read-only authenticated diagnostics' for a Run402 public URL or host/path pair, specifying it explains whether the current live release would serve the URL, including match, diagnostic body status, and warnings. This is a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes from siblings like 'diagnose_public_url' by being deployment-specific.

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 implies use when needing to check URL serving status (e.g., 'current live release'), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'diagnose_public_url', nor does it provide exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance.

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