decision_deploy

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions return values ('deployment metadata and deployed decision definition keys') which is helpful given no output schema exists, but fails to disclose critical mutation traits: whether deployment overwrites existing keys, versioning behavior, or error conditions for invalid DMN XML.

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 focused sentences: purpose statement, input requirements, and return value description. No filler text; every clause delivers specific operational information appropriate for the tool's complexity.

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?

Severely incomplete: empty input schema combined with unannotated behavior means the description should compensate with detailed parameter specifications and behavioral edge cases. It mentions expected inputs and outputs but lacks error handling, authentication requirements, or differentiation from similar deployment tools in the sibling list.

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?

Critical mismatch: schema defines 0 parameters while description explicitly instructs to 'Provide DMN XML, a .dmn filename, and a deployment name' (three specific inputs). Despite the 0-parameter baseline of 4, describing parameters that do not exist in the schema creates confusion about how the agent should populate the empty input object required for invocation.

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?

Clear specific verb (Deploy) and resource (DMN decision artifact). Distinguishes from generic siblings like 'deployment_create' by specifying 'DMN decision artifact', though it does not explicitly articulate the distinction between this tool and the generic deployment alternative.

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 guidance provided on when to use this tool versus the generic 'deployment_create' sibling, nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., valid DMN XML format requirements) or when to prefer alternatives like 'decision_evaluate'.

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