get-deployments

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation via 'Get' but does not explicitly confirm safety, mention pagination behavior despite the limit parameter, describe the return format, or note any rate limits or auth requirements.

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, efficient sentence with no redundancy or filler. However, it is arguably too minimal, lacking the additional sentences needed to address behavioral transparency or usage guidelines.

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?

Given the presence of numerous sibling tools dealing with different Rollbar entities (items, projects, versions), the description fails to clarify what deployments are or how they relate to these other resources. With no output schema and no annotations, this minimal description leaves significant gaps in contextual understanding.

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 100%, with limit and project adequately documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific context, but this is acceptable given the complete schema coverage establishes the baseline of 3.

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 clearly states the verb (Get) and resource (deployments data) and identifies the external system (Rollbar). However, it fails to differentiate from siblings like get-version or list-items, leaving ambiguity about what constitutes a 'deployment' versus other Rollbar entities.

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 tool versus alternatives like get-version or list-projects. The optional 'project' parameter lacks usage guidance (e.g., when to omit it), and there are no stated prerequisites or exclusions.

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