Switch deploy branch

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

Annotations already mark the tool as non-read-only and non-idempotent, but the description adds concrete behavioral detail: it returns immediately once the redeploy is triggered, and every call starts another build. This warns the agent about async completion and repeated side effects effectively.

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?

Three short sentences with no filler: the use case is front-loaded and the two behavior warnings are concise. Every sentence adds information an agent needs.

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 description covers the primary use case, the return behavior, and the non-idempotent side effect, which is adequate for a simple three-parameter tool. However, it omits concrete parameter semantics and any validation or error constraints, so it is not fully complete without additional context.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the project, service, or branch parameters or their expected values. The branch parameter is only vaguely implied by 'switch which branch a Lizard service deploys from', while project and service are left to be guessed from names alone. This does not compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 a specific operation: switching the branch a Lizard service deploys from and redeploying on that branch. The verb 'switch' and the resource 'deploy branch' make the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinguish it from generic redeploy/restart 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?

It opens with 'Use this when the user wants to switch which branch...', which explicitly tells an agent when to invoke it. It does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it stops short of full exclusion/alternative guidance.

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