Get GitLab deployment

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and destructive=false, so the bar is lower. The description adds useful behavioral context: the approval summary is only available on Premium/Ultimate tiers, and it lists the specific deployment fields returned, which goes beyond the structured annotation data.

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?

One front-loaded sentence that starts with the action, includes the resource, and packs the key output details without filler. Every word earns its place.

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 simple read-only get-by-ID tool, this is complete. The description names the resource, the required input is covered by the schema, and key output categories are listed. An output schema exists, so further return-value explanation is unnecessary.

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%; both parameters have meaningful descriptions ('GitLab project ID or full path such as group/project' and 'Numeric ID of the deployment'). The tool description adds no parameter-level detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb+resource: 'Retrieve a single deployment' and enumerates the returned data (status, environment, deployable, pipeline, approval summary). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_deployments and get_deployment_approval_status.

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 fetching one deployment by ID but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions. It does not contrast with list_deployments or get_deployment_approval_status, leaving the when-to-use guidance implicit.

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