Compose: deploy stack

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It notes the operation runs in the background and optionally rebuilds/scopes services, but omits side effects (e.g., state changes, destruction of previous stack versions) and any required permissions or prerequisites. For a mutation tool, more transparency is needed.

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 clear, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The essential information is delivered efficiently, earning 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?

Given the tool complexity (4 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the main operation, optional flags, and positioning among siblings. It lacks return value info but that is not expected without an output schema. Sufficient for decision-making.

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 coverage is 100%, with all four parameters already described in the input schema. The description only echoes the optional rebuild and service scoping, adding no new semantic meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is 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?

Clearly states the action ('Deploy or update a Compose stack') and the resource, using a specific verb. The mention of `compose up -d` grounds it in a familiar operation, and the 'one-shot ship it' phrase distinguishes it from other compose tools.

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?

The description implies this is the primary deployment action ('one-shot ship it'), giving clear context for use. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternatives like compose_restart or compose_down, which would strengthen guidance.

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