vercel_create_deployment

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses mutation behavior, caching behavior (force_new), and conditions requiring cache skip. But it doesn't address authentication, rate limits, or side effects like overwriting existing deployments.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste. First sentence states purpose, second explains parameters and usage. Efficient and front-loaded.

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?

Covers core use cases (redeploy, fresh deploy, cache skip) but lacks explanation for less common parameters (name, team_id, api_key) and no output schema or prerequisites. Adequate but not exhaustive for a tool with 8 params and no annotations.

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 63%; description adds meaning for key parameters (deployment_id, project_id, git_ref, force_new) by explaining their roles in redeploy vs fresh deploy. However, 3 params (name, team_id, api_key) have no description in either schema or description.

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?

Description explicitly states it's for creating a Vercel deployment, with two distinct modes (redeploy with deployment_id, fresh deploy with project_id+git_ref), clearly distinguishing from sibling Vercel tools which handle env vars, listing, etc.

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?

Provides clear context on when to use each mode and when to set force_new=true (e.g., after env var changes). However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use this tool or suggest alternatives beyond the described modes.

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