deployment_get_resources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds useful context that results are paginated and sourced from GET /deployment/api/resources, but it does not cover auth requirements, rate limits, filter semantics, or return shape. Given the existing annotations, a 3 is appropriate.

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 only three short sentences and is front-loaded with the core action. The first two sentences are somewhat redundant ("Fetch all resources" / "Returns a paginated list of resources"), which keeps it from a 5.

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 16-parameter list tool with no output schema and many sibling read endpoints, this description is too sparse. It does not explain the resource domain, how filters/expand/sort interact, pagination defaults, or what the returned resource records contain, leaving the agent dependent almost entirely on 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 16 parameters are already documented in the schema. The description only mentions pagination and adds no meaning for filter, expand, sort, orderby, tags, origin, or the various filter parameters. Baseline 3 is correct when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Fetch all resources") and adds that it returns a paginated list and the backing endpoint. However, "resources" is generic in a large deployment_* sibling family, and the description does not differentiate it from tools like deployment_get_resource_by_id or deployment_get_deployments.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance, no named alternatives, and no exclusions. An agent must infer from the name and schema that this is the bulk listing tool rather than a single-resource or deployment-listing tool.

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