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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds real value beyond that by disclosing ordering (most recent first), pagination behavior, the underlying API endpoint, and the response envelope shape. It stops short of stating default per_page or total-count behavior in meta.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the core behavior (list, most recent first, paginated) front-loaded before the endpoint and return-shape detail.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the return shape ({ deployments, meta.pagination }), which is the key missing piece. Minor gaps remain around default page size and whether meta carries a total count, but nothing essential to a correct call is absent.

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 app, page, and per_page are already documented with formats and bounds. The description only reinforces that results are paginated and hints at meta.pagination; it adds no syntax or default values beyond 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List an app's deployments") plus the ordering ("most recent first") and pagination, which cleanly separates it from the singular scalingo_get_deployment sibling. It never names that sibling explicitly, but the plural/ordering framing is enough to disambiguate.

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?

Usage is implied — you call this to enumerate all deployments of one app — but there is no explicit when-to-use versus scalingo_get_deployment (single deployment) or scalingo_trigger_deployment. The agent must infer the routing from the tool name.

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