get_deployment

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It discloses read behavior and specific return fields, and notes 0-indexed ID. However, it does not discuss permissions, rate limits, or error handling for invalid IDs.

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?

Single sentence that efficiently conveys purpose, parameter, and return fields. No wasted words.

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 simple retrieval tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It could mention error behavior (e.g., missing ID) or pagination if applicable, but overall adequate.

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 100%, and description adds '0-indexed' which clarifies the ID format beyond the schema. This adds meaningful context to a single parameter.

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 the tool gets deployment details by ID, lists the specific fields returned (token address, deployer, name, symbol, supply, timestamp), and differentiates from siblings such as deploy_token (creates), get_deployer_tokens (lists by deployer), get_factory_info (factory info), and get_token_info (info by token address).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies use for fetching a specific deployment by ID, but does not mention when not to use it, prerequisites, or error cases. Adequate but lacking directive context.

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