appwrite_list_deployments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It fails to indicate whether this is read-only (implied by 'list' but not explicit), what the 'queries' parameter expects (Appwrite query syntax), what fields 'search' targets, or whether results are paginated.

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?

Brief and front-loaded, but the '[UNIFIED]' tag wastes space with unexplained metadata. Otherwise efficient, though brevity comes at the cost of necessary detail given the lack of schema descriptions.

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?

Inadequate for a 4-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations. The description omits critical context: deployment states/lifecycle, required parameter semantics, return structure, and filtering capabilities inherent in the schema parameters.

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% and the description completely fails to compensate. No explanation of 'site' (project identifier?), 'function_id' format, 'queries' syntax, or 'search' scope. All four parameters remain undocumented beyond their types.

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?

States the basic action (list) and resource (deployments) but lacks scope clarification (pagination, filtering behavior) and does not distinguish from sibling 'appwrite_get_deployment' (single retrieval vs. listing). The '[UNIFIED]' prefix adds metadata noise without semantic value.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use get_deployment vs. list_deployments), no mention of required prerequisites (site/function_id context), and no exclusion criteria.

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