deployment_get_deployments_for_project

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that the return value is a count, which is useful but minimal; it does not explain count semantics, such as whether it includes deleted or all deployment states.

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 short and front-loads the return value before showing the endpoint. The endpoint line is somewhat redundant with the annotation title but still efficient for a small tool.

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 one-parameter read-only count operation with fully described schema and safety annotations, the description is largely sufficient. A small gap remains around what exactly is counted, but no output schema exists and the core call behavior is clear.

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%, and the single projectId parameter is documented in the schema as the project path ID. The description reinforces this through the endpoint template but adds no extra meaning beyond the schema.

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 outcome: it returns a count of deployments associated with a project, and includes the exact endpoint. It is clear what the tool does, although it does not explicitly contrast itself with deployment_get_deployments or other deployment list tools.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this count endpoint versus deployment_get_deployments, deployment_get_deployment_by_id, or iaas_get_deployments. The only implied usage is that the caller has a projectId and wants a count.

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