get_deploy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read via 'get' and suggests the log is not truncated ('full log'), but it says nothing about permissions, behavior for an unknown deploy_id, or whether the log is inline vs. 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?

It is very short and front-loaded, which is good, but a single unpunctuated fragment provides no structure or informative lead. There is no wasted text, yet the minimalism comes at the cost of specification rather than efficiency.

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 lookup with no output schema, the description minimally covers what it returns ('with its full log'). It remains thin on error behavior and log size/format, gaps that matter since no annotations or output schema exist to fill them.

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 100% for the single deploy_id parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no syntax, format, or example meaning for the id beyond what the schema already states.

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 fragment 'A deploy with its full log' implies fetching a single deploy along with its log output, which is enough to distinguish it from list_deploys and get_logs at a rough level. However, it is a noun phrase rather than a verb+resource statement, so the agent must infer the operation (retrieve) rather than read it explicitly.

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 guidance on when to use this instead of siblings such as get_logs, list_deploys, or get_service. The 'full log' mention hints at log retrieval but never states the condition that selects this tool over get_logs.

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