google_promote_release

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Promote a release' indicating mutation, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether it commits the edit, if the source track release is removed, or authorization requirements). Insufficient detail for safe invocation.

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?

A single sentence that is clear and front-loaded with the verb and resource. No wasted words; every part contributes to understanding.

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?

For a tool with 6 parameters (4 required) and no output schema, the description is very brief. Missing context such as whether the operation requires an edit, if it triggers a commit, or what happens to the release in the source track. Completeness is insufficient for an agent to use safely.

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 has 83% coverage, meaning most parameters are described in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema (e.g., the example hints at fromTrack/toTrack but schema already has enums). 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 'Promote a release from one track to another (e.g. beta → production)' uses a specific verb 'Promote' and clearly indicates the resource (release and track). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'google_create_release' or 'google_get_track' by stating the action of moving between tracks.

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 a concrete example 'beta → production' implying when to use, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'google_create_release' or 'google_halt_release'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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