list_deploymentsList an app's deployments (most recent first), paginated. Scalingo API: GET /v1/apps/{app}/deployments. Returns { deployments: [...], meta: { pagination } }.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| app | Yes | The app name (e.g. my-production-app) or app id (app-…). | |
| page | No | Page number (1-based) for paginated lists. | |
| per_page | No | Entries per page (1-100). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark it as read-only. The description adds behavioral details: returns paginated results with most recent first, which is useful beyond the annotation.
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 very concise: three sentences covering purpose, API endpoint, and return format. No filler.
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 no output schema, the description provides the return structure ({ deployments, meta }) and ordering. Combined with the input schema, the tool is fully documented.
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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant new meaning to the parameters beyond the schema descriptions.
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 lists an app's deployments, with ordering (most recent first) and pagination. It is specific and distinct from sibling tools like get_deployment or list_apps.
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 implies usage for listing all deployments, but does not explicitly contrast with get_deployment for single deployment or trigger_deployment for creation. The context from sibling names makes it reasonably clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.