list_deployments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'list recent workflow runs' without stating that it is safe/read-only, whether it affects state, or any other side-effect or access requirements. This is minimal transparency beyond the core action.

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 sentence that is direct and to the point. No filler or redundant detail, making it highly efficient.

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 list tool, the description is adequate but lacks detail about return format, pagination, or the time window implied by 'recent'. The name mismatch with 'deployments' also creates ambiguity. Given the absence of an output schema and annotations, slightly more context would be needed for full completeness.

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%, with all three parameters (repo, limit, workflow) described. The tool description adds no extra param semantics beyond implying recency ('recent') and workflow filtering, but the schema already covers these. Thus baseline 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 states a clear action ('List') and resource ('recent workflow runs') with context ('for a repository'). However, the tool name 'list_deployments' clashes with the description's 'workflow runs', which could confuse agents expecting deployment objects. It is specific enough to be understood, but the naming inconsistency prevents a perfect score.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool over siblings like get_deployment or deploy. The description simply states what it does without specifying scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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