Deploy Artifact

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool requires ALLOW_WRITE permission and that deployment is asynchronous—both critical behavioral traits beyond what schema provides.

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 sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence gives purpose and permission, the second addresses asynchronous behavior and post-deployment actions. Perfectly front-loaded.

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 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral context (async, permission) but lacks detail on parameter roles and return value. It's adequate but leaves room for more parameter-specific guidance.

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 low (25%), and the description only says 'Choose the artifact type' without explaining other parameters like artifactId, version, or confirm. It adds minimal meaning to the parameter set beyond what the enums already imply.

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 'Deploy a design-time artifact to the runtime' with the verb 'deploy' and resource 'artifact'. It also mentions choosing the artifact type, distinguishing it from siblings like undeploy_artifact and status-checking 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?

The description provides clear context: deployment is asynchronous and suggests checking status with two specific sibling tools. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the async hint and status alternatives guide appropriate usage.

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