deploy_frontend

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing that it zips the build output, uploads it, auto-publishes on first deploy, returns the live URL, and explains the /api proxy behavior. This gives the agent a full picture of side effects and hosting behavior without contradicting the annotations.

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?

Four dense sentences, each earning its place: what it does, how it does it, what it returns, local-mode restriction, and API proxy note. No filler or redundancy.

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?

The description covers the key behaviors an agent needs: return URL, auto-publish on first deploy, local filesystem requirement, and proxy-based API calls. The phrase 'auto-published on first deploy' leaves some ambiguity about later deploys, and there is no output schema, but overall the tool is well-specified.

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?

With schema coverage at 67%, the description adds meaningful value for the most important parameter, dir, by defining it as the folder containing index.html and listing typical names (dist/, build/, out/). It does not add much for appId or organizationId, but the schema already covers the first and the second is optional.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Deploy a built static frontend to TaskLite hosting'. It then details the mechanism (zip, upload, return live URL), making the tool's purpose unmistakable and clearly distinct from siblings like publish_app or rollback_deployment.

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?

Provides clear context: the tool expects a built static frontend, targets TaskLite hosting, and explicitly warns it 'Runs only where the files are (local/stdio mode)'. It does not explicitly contrast with publish_app or other alternatives, but the guidance is strong enough for typical selection.

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