vercel_list_deployments

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so safety is covered. Beyond that the description adds nothing: it does not mention that an api_key is required, how results are paginated or defaulted, whether an unpaginated call returns everything, or whether teamId changes the scope of results.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity is partly under-specification rather than tight writing.

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?

Four undocumented parameters, no output schema, and no indication of return shape (deployment list fields) or pagination behavior. For a list tool whose filtering and auth semantics are entirely in the schema, the description is too thin to let an agent call it confidently.

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 0% across four parameters, and the description compensates only for projectId (implicitly). limit, teamId, and especially api_key — a credential whose presence/absence determines whether the call succeeds — are undocumented in both schema and 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List Vercel deployments') with a scoping qualifier ('for a project'), so the operation is unambiguous. It does not distinguish itself from siblings like vercel_get_deployment or vercel_create_deployment, but the verb/resource pair is clear on its own.

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 guidance on when to use this versus vercel_get_deployment (single deployment detail) or vercel_create_deployment, and no mention of when project scoping or team scoping matters. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name.

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