infra_deploys_tool

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not explain what 'recent' means, whether results are ordered, or if the tool has any side effects. No behavioral traits are disclosed beyond the basic premise.

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 a single, readable sentence with no wasted words. However, it is under-specified rather than concise-and-informative, carrying only the minimal core message.

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 tool with no annotations and minimal parameter info, the description is too brief. It does not clarify key context such as recency thresholds, limits, or the nature of results, relying entirely on the output schema to fill 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?

The schema has one parameter (limit_per_repo) with 0% description coverage. The description does not mention this parameter or how it affects results, leaving the agent to infer everything from the parameter name alone.

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 identifies the resource (GitHub Actions runs) and scope (configured deploy repos), which distinguishes it from sibling infra tools focused on status, logs, disk, and restart. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'list' or 'get', making the action implied rather than stated.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it returns, with no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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