Get deployment status

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only behavior is covered. The description adds value by disclosing that connection address and ports appear only once the deployment is ready, which helps the agent understand timing and response behavior.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler: the first states what the tool does and what it returns, and the second routes to the preferred sibling when relevant. The most important information is front-loaded.

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 single-parameter read tool with readOnlyHint and full schema coverage, the description is sufficient. An agent knows what to call, how to get the request_id, what to expect in the response, and when to use wait_for_deployment instead.

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?

The input schema already documents request_id fully, including that it is returned by edgegap_deploy, so schema coverage is 100%. The description reinforces this but does not add meaningful semantics beyond the schema, warranting the baseline score.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Read the current status of one deployment' and adds the relevant output ('connection address and ports once it is ready'). The singular 'one deployment' clearly distinguishes it from list-style siblings.

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?

It explicitly names the alternative edgegap_wait_for_deployment and gives the condition for preferring it: a deployment you just created, because that tool polls for you instead of requiring a loop. This is clear, actionable usage guidance.

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