railway-mcp

deployment_list

[API] List recent deployments for a service in a specific environment

Instructions

[API] List recent deployments for a service in a specific environment

⚡️ Best for: ✓ Viewing deployment history ✓ Monitoring service updates

→ Prerequisites: service_list

→ Next steps: deployment_logs, deployment_trigger

→ Related: service_info, service_restart

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>",
      "serviceId": "<serviceId>",
      "environmentId": "<environmentId>"
    },
    "name": "deployment_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Optional: Maximum number of deployments to return (default: 10)
`projectId`	Yes	ID of the project containing the service
`serviceId`	Yes	ID of the service to list deployments for
`environmentId`	Yes	ID of the environment to list deployments from (usually obtained from service_list)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 18, 2025

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided. Description does not disclose ordering, pagination, or default limit behavior beyond 'recent deployments'. For a list tool with a limit parameter, additional behavioral context would be helpful.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Extremely concise with structured sections (Best for, Prerequisites, Next steps, Related). Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, related tools, and usage context well. It does not describe the response format, but that is acceptable without an output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds minimal extra meaning, only noting that environmentId is 'usually obtained from service_list'. No further parameter elaboration.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states 'list recent deployments for a service in a specific environment' with specific verb and resource. The tool is distinct from siblings like deployment_logs, deployment_status, and deployment_trigger.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Includes explicit 'Best for' usage scenarios, prerequisites (service_list), next steps (deployment_logs, deployment_trigger), and related tools, providing clear guidance on when and how to use.

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