Get deployment options

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool 'lists' deployment targets, implying a read-only operation, and adds workflow instruction about presenting options and calling deploy. However, it does not disclose side effects, permission requirements, or return format, leaving some behavioral aspects unclear.

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 concise, with two sentences that front-load the core purpose and then provide actionable workflow guidance. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or fluff.

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?

The description adequately situates the tool within a larger workflow (Phase 6) and explains the expected next step (call deploy). However, it omits details about the return structure of the list and does not mention projectId, leaving minor gaps for a simple one-parameter tool.

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?

The schema has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), and the tool description does not explain the 'projectId' parameter at all. While the name is self-explanatory, the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema details, leaving the agent to infer its meaning and usage.

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 deployment targets with requirements and steps', using a specific verb and resource. It also identifies it as 'Phase 6 of the App Factory workflow', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like deploy that perform the actual deployment.

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 provides clear context on when to use this tool by labeling it 'Phase 6' and instructing to 'present the relevant options to the USER... and ask which they want, then call deploy.' This implies it precedes deploy, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions.

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