deployado_start_service

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety and repeat-call profile is carried by structured data. The description adds only the precondition that the target should be stopped; it doesn't say what happens if the service is already running, whether the call blocks until healthy, or whether it can fail on a transitioning state.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and with no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity borders on under-specification rather than true tightness.

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 single-parameter action tool with rich annotations and a fully described schema, the description covers the essential action and precondition. No output schema exists, but the missing pieces (behavior on an already-running service, blocking semantics) are secondary for this complexity level.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage ('Service ID (UUID)'), so the schema already fully documents it. The description adds nothing about the identifier beyond the schema, making baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Start ... service') and adds the precondition 'stopped', so the action is unambiguous. It does not distinguish itself from sibling deployado_restart_service, which performs an overlapping operation, so it falls short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

'a stopped service' implies the usage condition (the service must currently be stopped), but the description never says when to prefer this over deployado_restart_service or deployado_stop_service, nor what to do if the service is already running. Usage is only inferable.

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