get_deployment

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get one workflow run by id' without mentioning error handling, return format, auth requirements, or any other behavioral traits. This is insufficient for a tool with no structured safety hints.

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 zero extraneous words. It efficiently states the action and identifier, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 annotations, lack of output schema, and a potential naming mismatch, the description is too sparse to be fully self-contained. It does not explain what the returned object looks like, error cases, or how this tool fits into the broader workflow deployment context, leaving the agent with limited guidance.

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 fully describes both parameters (repo and run_id) with 100% coverage, so the description adds no additional meaning. Per guidelines, baseline for high schema coverage is 3, and the description merely says 'by id' without elaborating on parameter formats or relationships.

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 action ('Get one workflow run by id'), clearly distinguishing from listing siblings by focusing on a single item. However, there is a slight naming mismatch between the tool name ('get_deployment') and the described resource ('workflow run'), which could cause confusion but doesn't obscure the core purpose.

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?

The description implies usage when you need a single workflow run by ID, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like list_deployments or resolve_ref, nor provide context on when not to use this tool. The guidance is minimal and relies on inference.

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