get_deployment_status

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the kind of data returned (replicas, rollout complete, images, conditions) but does not mention edge cases, error behavior, or permission requirements. Adequate but not enhanced.

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 sentences, front-loaded with return data and followed by usage. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description adequately outlines the key return fields (desired/ready/available replicas, rollout completeness, container images, degraded conditions). Sufficient for a status check tool, though could elaborate on condition interpretation.

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%, with both parameters described in the input schema. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema defaults or constraints, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb 'Returns' and specifies the resource 'rollout status for a Deployment', listing specific fields (replicas, completion, images, conditions). It distinguishes from siblings like get_pod_status by focusing on deployment-level status.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use to check if a deployment rolled out successfully or is stuck', providing clear when-to-use guidance. Does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but sibling tools cover pod-level details.

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