wafle_system_release_deploy

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

While the destructiveHint annotation already flags danger, the description adds critical behavior context: it 'touches production', requires user confirmation, and kicks off a server-side pipeline. This goes beyond the annotation and helps the agent understand the real-world impact.

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 description is two tight sentences: the first states purpose, the second warns of danger and gives steps. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 destructive deploy tool with two well-documented params and no output schema, the description covers purpose, safety, prerequisite steps, and alternatives. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to decide whether and how to invoke it.

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 descriptions for both 'version' and 'component' providing examples. The tool description itself adds no additional parameter semantics, so it relies on 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?

The description clearly states 'Deploy a specific version of a component' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like wafle_system_release_rollback and wafle_system_versions_list. It unambiguously conveys the action and target.

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 provides explicit usage guidance: confirm with the user, run wafle_system_versions_list first, and prefer staging if available. This tells the agent when and how to use the tool, and offers an alternative approach (staging).

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