deployment_get_deployment_resources

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

The annotations already disclose read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that results are paginated and includes the underlying endpoint, but it does not provide further behavioral context such as permission requirements or response characteristics.

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 front-loaded and only a few sentences long. The endpoint line slightly duplicates the annotation title, but overall it remains efficient and easy to scan.

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 12-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description gives only a minimal return-value statement: a paginated list of resources. It is sufficient to call the tool because the input schema is fully documented, but it does not explain response structure or filtering behavior beyond the schema.

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%, so all 12 parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description only mentions the deployment ID path parameter and adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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: fetching resources associated with a deployment, returned as a paginated list. It is clear enough to distinguish from generic resource tools, but it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives such as deployment_get_resources.

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 deployment ID and the phrase 'associated with a deployment,' so an agent can infer when to use it. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over related deployment/resource tools or when not to use it.

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