deployment_getById

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It compensates for missing output schema by listing specific return fields (name, source, time, tenant ID), which is valuable. However, it fails to disclose error behaviors (e.g., ID not found), safety characteristics, or idempotency.

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 with zero waste. First sentence establishes purpose, second documents return values. Appropriately front-loaded and sized for the tool's complexity.

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, description adequately covers return values (compensating for no output schema), but lacks error handling details and does not clarify how the ID is provided given the empty input schema. Meets minimum viable completeness but has clear 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?

Zero parameters in input schema establishes baseline of 4 per scoring guidelines. Description references 'by its ID' explaining the retrieval method, though note the schema appears incomplete as it lacks the ID parameter entirely.

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 provides specific verb (Retrieve), resource (deployment), and scope (by its ID). This clearly distinguishes from sibling deployment_list (plural/all) and deployment_create/deployment_delete (mutations).

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 provided on when to use this specific tool versus deployment_list or other retrieval alternatives. No mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing the ID beforehand) or error conditions.

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