list_deployments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic function without mentioning pagination behavior, filtering semantics, response format, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a read tool with pagination and filter parameters.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It efficiently communicates the core purpose without extraneous detail.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description is under-specified. For a list tool with pagination and filtering, it would benefit from mentioning that it returns a paginated list or how the environment filter affects results. As is, it provides only the minimal action statement.

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 provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter context beyond what the schema already contains, making it neutral.

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 the specific action ('List deployments') and scope ('for a repository'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_branches, list_tags, and get_deployment. The verb+resource structure is direct and unambiguous.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and description, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor any mention of exclusions or prerequisites. The description does not reference related tools such as get_deployment.

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