Deploy MONA Agent trên MONA Cloud

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does usefully reveal that the tool currently returns a clear stub status and that sandbox mode is free with no wallet needed. However, it does not explain actual side effects, authentication requirements, or what happens outside sandbox mode.

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 compact and contains no filler; the stub status and sandbox behavior are stated in a single short sentence. The main downside is that 'Slot runtime agent wave' is dense and unclear, which reduces usability despite the economy of words.

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 deploy-like tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the description is incomplete. An agent cannot fully infer what template means, what a successful non-stub response would look like, or which sibling tool should be chosen instead.

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?

The required parameter 'template' has no schema description and the description never mentions it, leaving its meaning unclear. The sandbox=true wording is essentially duplicated from the schema, so it adds little new semantic value beyond what is already structured.

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 verb ('Slot') and a resource ('runtime agent wave') and states that it returns a clear stub status, so it is not a pure tautology. However, 'Slot runtime agent wave kế tiếp' is cryptic and does not clearly say whether this actually deploys an agent, schedules a wave, or returns a placeholder. It also does not distinguish itself from siblings like agent_deploy or vibecloud_agent_deploy.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus the many sibling deploy tools. The sandbox=true note is parameter-level information, not tool-selection guidance. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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