deploy_to_shiped

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It discloses the key behavior (immediate URL return, shareable), but it does not mention potential side effects (e.g., overwriting an existing project), authentication needs, or error handling. For a deployment action, this is a moderate gap.

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?

Two sentences, zero fluff, and the core purpose is front-loaded. Every sentence adds value: the first states the action and result, the second provides usage context.

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?

Given the rich schema (100% coverage) and no output schema, the description adequately explains the primary outcome (URL). It could detail error cases or overwrite behavior, but for a typical deploy tool with sibling list/delete, the agent likely has enough context. Missing details are minor.

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 all parameters (html, name, type, files) already have detailed descriptions. The tool description only adds a general mention of 'HTML/CSS/JS' without enriching parameter meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 clearly states the specific verb 'Deploy' and resource 'Shiped', and the outcome (instant public HTTPS URL). It also contrasts with siblings by focusing on deployment, while siblings are list/delete. This makes it unambiguous.

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 provides a clear when-to-use context: 'Use after generating code with an AI to make it live and shareable.' While it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use or name alternatives, the sibling set (list/delete) makes the deployment role obvious. A brief exclusion would be nice but is not critical.

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