rollout_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It declares a READ operation, which is transparent, but omits details about behavior on missing deployments, pagination, or result structure. Basic transparency is present but lacks depth.

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 extremely concise: one header line and three argument bullets. No wasted words, information is front-loaded. Ideal structure for quick parsing.

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?

Despite moderate complexity (3 params, 1 required), the description fails to explain the return value or output format. No output schema exists, so the agent is left to infer what 'list' produces (e.g., list of revision IDs, timestamps). This is a notable gap.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaningful context for each parameter: 'name: Deployment name.', 'namespace: Namespace; omit for the target's default namespace.', 'target: k8s target name from config.' This compensates for the schema's lack of 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?

Description starts with '[READ] List a deployment's rollout revisions (from its replicasets).' This is a specific verb ('List') and resource ('deployment's rollout revisions'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like rollout_status or rollout_undo.

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 states the function but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives such as rollout_status or rollout_undo_deployment. Usage is implied through the verb 'List', but no when-not or alternative suggestions are given.

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