vercel_list_deployments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full transparency burden. It only states the basic operation but omits behavioral traits like whether the operation is read-only, default pagination, rate limits, or that it filters by state and timestamps. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand side effects or constraints.

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 concise sentence with no extraneous words. It front-loads the key action and resource. While it could be slightly more informative without adding length, it remains appropriately sized for a simple list operation.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not explain return format, ordering, default limit, or behavior when no projectId is provided. For a tool with moderate complexity, the description is incomplete.

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?

All 5 parameters have descriptions in the input schema, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description adds minimal value beyond the schema (e.g., hinting that projectId is optional). According to the rubric, with high schema coverage the baseline is 3, and no significant additional meaning is provided.

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' and the resource 'deployments', with added context of 'for a project or all projects'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like vercel_get_deployment (single deployment) and vercel_list_projects (lists projects). However, it could be more precise by specifying that it returns a list of deployments with optional filters.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as vercel_get_deployment for a single deployment or vercel_list_projects for project listings. The user must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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