deployment_get

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful state-dependent behavior: serviceUrl and deployedAt are null until the deployment reaches status ready. It does not cover permissions, error behavior, or broader return semantics, so it is adequate but not rich.

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 two tight sentences, front-loads the tool's action, then adds the owner-default and null-field caveat. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a simple one-parameter get tool with read-only annotations, the description covers invocation and one return-state caveat. Without an output schema, however, it still leaves the broader shape of 'details' unspecified, so it is adequate but 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?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single 'deployment' parameter, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful information beyond the schema by noting that a bare slug causes the owner to default to the account owner.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Get details for one deployment'), and the singular 'one deployment' helps separate it from deployments_list. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as deployment_health, deployment_logs, deployment_metrics, or deployment_predict.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives, and no exclusions. The description explains the input reference format but does not help an agent decide when this tool is preferable to sibling deployment inspection tools.

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