List GitLab deployments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the pagination bound (100 per page) which is useful behavioral context. No contradiction with annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and each word adds value. It is concise without being under-specified.

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 the tool has 12 parameters, an output schema, and good annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: listing, filters, and pagination bound. It doesn't explain defaults (e.g., sort order) but those are in the schema. The description is sufficient for the complexity level.

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 83%, so most parameters are already described in the schema. The description adds value by summarizing the filter categories (status, environment, ordering, time-range) and explicitly noting the 100-per-page limit. It provides a high-level overview that helps the agent understand the intent beyond individual parameter 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 uses a specific verb (List) and resource (deployments for a project), and enumerates key filter dimensions (status, environment, ordering, time-range). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like list_environments or get_deployment, which focus on different resources or granularity.

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 retrieving a paginated list of deployments with optional filters. It doesn't explicitly state when to use alternatives (e.g., get_deployment for a single deployment), but the context is clear enough for a typical read-only list scenario. No misleading guidance.

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