vercel-deployment-mcp

Get a deployment

get_deployment

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a specific Vercel deployment by its ID or URL and view its current state.

Instructions

Fetch one deployment by ID or URL, including its current state.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "idOrUrl": "<idOrUrl>"
    },
    "name": "get_deployment"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`idOrUrl`	Yes	Deployment ID (dpl_…) or deployment URL

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`item`	Yes
`receipt`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Aug 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds minimal behavioral context ('including its current state'), but this does not go beyond what the output schema likely provides, so the added transparency value is modest.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that leads with the action verb, states the resource and identification method, and adds the key detail about current state. Every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

This is a simple read-only fetch with a single parameter, an output schema, and comprehensive annotations. The description adequately covers what the tool does, how to identify the deployment, and what is returned (current state), and the output schema handles return values, so nothing critical is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'idOrUrl' fully documented as 'Deployment ID (dpl_…) or deployment URL'. The description repeats this idea ('by ID or URL') without adding new semantic detail, so it does not exceed the baseline provided by the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses the specific verb 'Fetch' and clearly identifies the resource as a deployment, also specifying the lookup method (by ID or URL) and that it includes current state. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_deployments and get_project.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies this is for fetching a single known deployment, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over list_deployments or exclude alternatives. The usage guidance is present only implicitly, not explicitly.

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

Deploy Server