marketplace_deploy

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the async nature of the operation (it starts a job) plus how to observe progress via polling. That is real behavioral value, but it omits the safety profile of the 'confirm' gate and whether the deploy is destructive or reversible.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the primary action comes first and the follow-up hint second. It is terse rather than padded, though that terseness borders on under-specification.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but for a deploy tool with a confirm gate and 0% parameter coverage, the description leaves too much undefined. An agent cannot tell what 'confirm' does or what 'params_json' expects.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does not. 'module' appears only incidentally in the polling hint, while 'confirm' and 'params_json' are entirely unexplained despite being central to invoking a deploy safely.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Start a marketplace deploy job'), which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like marketplace_uninstall or marketplace_list. It lacks explicit sibling differentiation, but the deploy action is unambiguous.

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 second sentence gives a follow-up action ('Poll marketplace_call(module, 'log')'), which is genuinely useful guidance on what to do after invoking. However, there is no statement of when to use this vs alternatives, prerequisites, or what the confirm parameter gates.

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