Alias cũ của cloud_agent_deploy

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one piece of context the annotations don't: sandbox=true costs nothing and needs no wallet. Beyond that it says nothing about prerequisites or what the deploy actually changes, which is thin for a non-idempotent, open-world mutation.

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 clauses, front-loaded with the alias/routing information and the sandbox cost note. Nothing is padded, though the sandbox clause duplicates the schema description rather than adding to it.

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 low-complexity two-parameter alias with no output schema, the routing guidance plus the sandbox cost note is close to adequate. It still leaves open what template values are accepted, whether auth is required, and whether the alias behaves identically to cloud_agent_deploy — relevant for a non-idempotent write.

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 50%: sandbox carries a schema description that is repeated verbatim in the tool description (no added value), while the required template parameter has no description in either place and only a regex pattern. The description does nothing to explain what a template value is or where to get one.

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 it is a backwards-compatible alias and names the canonical tool (cloud_agent_deploy), which tells an agent exactly what resource is being deployed and which sibling is the real entry point. It is slightly indirect — the deployment verb is only implied via the sibling reference rather than stated — but the purpose 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?

"dùng cloud_agent_deploy cho tích hợp mới" explicitly routes new integrations to the canonical tool, implying this one is only for existing/legacy callers. That is a clear when-to-use/when-not-to-use rule, though it doesn't say whether the alias is deprecated or will eventually be removed.

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