deployado_update_app

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it doesn't say whether omitted fields are left unchanged, whether changes trigger a redeploy or restart, or which settings are irreversible.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no waste, but it is under-specified rather than concise. The brevity leaves critical gaps an agent needs filled.

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 destructive 11-parameter mutation with no output schema and no annotations beyond hints. The description says nothing about partial-update semantics, side effects like redeploys, or the response, so it is not complete enough for the agent to call it safely.

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%, so every parameter including the deploy_gate and auto_rollback semantics is already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning, which is acceptable at baseline 3 given full schema coverage.

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?

"Update an existing app's configuration" states a clear verb and resource, which separates it from create_app/delete_app by name. But "configuration" is vague about the 11 fields actually editable (name, port, dockerfile path, auto-deploy, rollback window), and it does not distinguish this from deployado_update_project or deployado_deploy.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this instead of deployado_deploy, deployado_rollback, or deployado_update_project, and no mention of prerequisites. The agent must infer everything from the tool name.

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