publish_app

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

Annotations only indicate the operation is not read-only and not destructive; the description adds that it changes endpoint accessibility, making the app externally reachable. It does not discuss rollback or permission requirements, but with annotations present the added context is meaningful.

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?

The entire description is one efficient sentence with the main verb front-loaded and the key prerequisite/effect stated without wasted words. It earns its place.

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 simple two-parameter action, the description conveys purpose, timing, and effect, making it minimally viable. It falls short of fully complete because it does not explain the optional organizationId or the behavior on already-published apps, and there is no output schema to clarify return values.

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 0%, so the description must explain the parameters, but it mentions none. 'appId' can be inferred from 'an app,' but 'organizationId' is left entirely unexplained, and the schema provides no descriptions.

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 names a specific verb ('Publish') and resource ('app') and states the operational consequence ('required before its API endpoints accept external calls'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like deploy_frontend and create_app_endpoint.

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?

It explicitly identifies the precondition: publishing must happen before API endpoints can accept external calls, so an agent knows when in the lifecycle to invoke it. It does not name alternatives or exclusion cases, hence not a 5.

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