onboarding_get_deployment_by_id

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, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description's only addition is that the deployment is scoped to the current organization — useful, but thin, and it says nothing about what a not-found or cross-org lookup does.

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 same sentence is restated three times (plain text, then repeated, then as a raw HTTP path), so the description is padded rather than front-loaded. No sentence after the first earns its place.

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 single-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema and rich annotations, this is minimally sufficient — an agent knows it fetches one deployment by id. However, without any hint about the return shape or relationship to the list-style sibling, the definition does just enough.

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 'id' parameter is documented as the path id, so the schema carries the burden. The description adds no detail on id format or where the id is obtained, leaving it at the baseline for a high-coverage 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 verb+resource ('Get ... onboarding deployment') is identifiable, but the description repeats it three times rather than clarifying anything, and 'the selected onboarding deployment' is vague. It does not distinguish this from sibling tools like onboarding_get_deployment, deployment_get_deployment_by_id, or iaas_get_single_deployment, which an agent must choose between.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusion criteria. The only contextual hint is 'in the current organization', which scopes the lookup but does not guide tool selection among the many deployment getters.

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