Delimit Deploy Site

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing local git mutation plus a network Vercel deploy, pre-validation of the Vercel binding, timeout behavior returning status=pending with an SHA, the absence of rollback, and the staged_only safety semantics. It also correctly aligns with destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so there is no 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?

The description is well-organized with clear sections and front-loaded purpose, but it repeats the ChatOps env-var injection detail in two separate paragraphs and is somewhat longer than necessary. Minor trimming would make it more concise while preserving all the valuable 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?

For a destructive, network-triggering 7-parameter tool, the description covers prerequisites, when-not-to-use, side effects, timeout fallback behavior, and the rollback alternative. Since an output schema exists, the return-value details do not need to be restated here, making this description complete for safe and correct invocation.

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 already 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful constraints: repo_path must be an explicit worktree root, project_path must remain inside repo_path, and staged_only=false requires explicit paths and never uses git add -A. This adds value beyond the schema, though some parameter-specific details are still left to the schema.

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 first sentence names a concrete action ('Ship a static / Next.js site via git push to the Vercel pipeline') and the sibling contrast explicitly distinguishes it from delimit_deploy_publish and delimit_deploy_npm. This gives the agent an unambiguous model of what the tool does and how it differs from nearby deploy tools.

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 contains explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections, names the correct siblings for npm, container, and rollback flows, and tells the agent to pair with delimit_deploy_verify on the resulting URL. This leaves no ambiguity about when this tool is the right choice.

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