deployado_install_service

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond restating that it installs from a template — no mention of provisioning side effects, whether the service starts immediately, expected failure modes, or that non-idempotent repeats create duplicates.

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?

One tight sentence with the action and source front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, but the brevity edges toward under-specification rather than ideal conciseness.

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?

This is a mutating provisioning tool with a free-form nested 'config' object and no output schema, so the description should say what gets created, what config accepts, and what the caller gets back (e.g., a service ID). All of that is absent, leaving the agent to infer the post-call state.

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 100%: name, template_id, memory_mb and the open-ended config object are all documented inline, including a pointer to list_service_templates. The description adds no extra semantics, which is the baseline 3 case when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Specific verb ('Install') plus resource ('new service') plus source ('marketplace template') tells the agent this provisions a service instance rather than starting an existing one. It is distinguishable from start_service in principle, though it never names the sibling.

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 when-to-use or when-not guidance, and no mention of alternatives such as deploy_blueprint or create_app, which are adjacent provisioning paths. The only routing hint (list_service_templates) lives in the schema, not the description.

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