timeweb_deploy_app

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action 'Trigger a new deployment' without revealing side effects, asynchronicity of the deployment, possible failure conditions (e.g., app not existing or already deploying), or what the response contains. This is a thin description for a mutating operation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is concise and easy to parse, though it could include a bit more context without losing efficiency.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It lacks context about the deployment lifecycle, what triggers a new deployment implies (e.g., asynchronous operation), and what information the caller can expect. The one-line description is not sufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents app_id, format, and commit_id adequately. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond this, so the baseline of 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 uses the specific verb 'Trigger' and identifies the resource as 'a new deployment for a PaaS application'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like timeweb_app_action (general app actions) and timeweb_stop_deploy (stopping deployments).

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives like timeweb_list_app_deploys (listing deployments) or timeweb_app_action (other app lifecycle actions), nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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