List Deployments

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds ordering ('most recent first'), pagination details, and the filtering limitation, which are useful beyond annotations.

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 well-structured: first line purpose, then limitation, then OAuth scope, then Args list with defaults, then Returns. Every sentence adds value, no repetition.

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 list tool with pagination and an output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, parameters, ordering, limitation, authentication, and return type. It is complete and no gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description documents all parameters: repo_slug (required), workspace (optional default), page_size (default 20), max_pages (default 1, max recommended 10). This fully compensates for missing schema descriptions.

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 clearly states 'List deployments for a repository (deployment history, most recent first).' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_deployment, list_environments.

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?

It explicitly mentions the API limitation on server-side filtering and advises client-side filtering by environment. It also requires the 'deployment' OAuth scope. No explicit alternatives, but the context is clear.

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