list_deploys

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions reading from a local file, implying a safe read operation, but omits details such as default limit, ordering, recency definition, and whether network access or auth is required.

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 a single, clear sentence with no redundant words. It is appropriately brief for a simple tool, though additional details could improve completeness without sacrificing conciseness.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, and two optional parameters, the description lacks critical context such as default behavior, the meaning of 'recent', and the effect of the limit parameter. It feels incomplete for a tool with these features.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It only mentions the 'domain' filter, leaving the 'limit' parameter unexplained. The description does not specify that 'limit' controls the number of results returned.

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 action (list), the resource (deploys from local Krexel state file), and an optional filter (by domain). It distinguishes from siblings like list_files or get_logs by specifying the source and purpose.

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 viewing recent deploys but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_status or rollback. No when-not or prerequisite information is given.

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