deploy_site_dir

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: tree walking, hashing, incremental upload, skipped files (.git, node_modules, .DS_Store), symlink rejection, and cost (free with active tier). This provides good transparency for an unannotated tool.

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 concise, front-loaded with the main purpose, and includes necessary details about file skipping and cost. Every sentence adds value.

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's complexity (static site deployment with diff logic), the description covers the process, limitations, and cost. No output schema exists, but the return value (deployment info) is implicit; additional detail on return format would raise the score.

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?

Input schema covers all parameters with detailed descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, such as the 'v1.32 plan/commit transport' detail. 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 states that the tool deploys a static site from a local directory, with clear verb ('Deploy') and resource ('static site from a local directory'). It explains the process (walks tree, hashes, uploads diff). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like deploy_site, leaving some 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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description implies it's for deploying a static site from a local directory, but does not mention when not to use it or direct to siblings like deploy_function for serverless functions.

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