redeploy_app

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the redeployment action but does not describe side effects (e.g., downtime, state preservation, version implications). The tool likely has significant impact, but this is unaddressed.

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 a single concise sentence but omits critical details, making it under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It is front-loaded with the action, but the overall structure would benefit from additional 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 complexity of redeploying an app, the description is incomplete. It lacks prerequisites (app must exist?), effects on running state, and error conditions. The output schema exists but does not compensate for the lack of behavioral and usage context.

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 only parameter 'app_name' lacks schema description (0% coverage). The description does not elaborate on the parameter beyond its name, failing to specify format, source, or validation rules. It adds no value over the schema's minimal structure.

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 tool redeploys an app using its current configuration. The verb 'Redeploy' and resource 'app' are specific, and the phrase 'current configuration' distinguishes it from configuration updates or upgrades. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar operations like restart or upgrade.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as start_app, upgrade_app, or update_app_config. There is no mention of prerequisites, required app state, or scenarios where redeployment is appropriate.

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