Deploy the website

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

Adds valuable context beyond annotations: commits/pushes, no-ops if git not enabled, uses local git credentials. This complements the readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false annotations without contradiction.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with no redundancy. Every sentence provides essential information efficiently.

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?

Comprehensive for a non-idempotent mutation tool: covers purpose, prerequisites, execution context, and no-op behavior. Lacks explicit mention of return values or error cases, but these are acceptable given no output schema.

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 description clarifies the 'project' parameter as the project to deploy, and explains the 'push' and 'message' parameters in context of optional pushing and custom commit messages. With 67% schema coverage, the description compensates for the missing schema on 'project'.

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 'Re-render the project's site and publish it by committing... the MCP equivalent of the old website deploy.' It uses a specific verb-resource pair and distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'set_git_config' or 'publish_media_to_site'.

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 explicitly preconditions the git integration via 'set_git_config' and notes that the tool no-ops with a reason if not set. However, it does not contrast with other deploy-like tools or provide exclusions for when not to use.

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