Check DevOps Center Commit Status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description's 'Retrieves' and 'Shows' align with these. It adds value by specifying that the tool returns recent commits and deployment outcomes, going slightly beyond the annotations.

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 two compact sentences with no filler. It front-loads the main action and result, and the parameter note is minimal.

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?

With one parameter and strong annotations, the description adequately explains the tool's purpose and output ('recent commits and their deployment outcomes'). It lacks detail on exact response format, but that is acceptable given the tool's simplicity and no output schema.

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 100% with a single parameter 'workItemId' already described as 'DevOps Center work item ID'. The description repeats this exact phrase without adding extra semantics, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieves') and identifies the resource ('commit and deployment status for a DevOps Center work item'). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like sf_commit_devops_work_item or sf_checkout_devops_work_item by focusing on status retrieval.

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?

The description implies when to use it: to check commit and deployment status for a work item, clarifying it shows recent commits and outcomes. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear among the DevOps Center sibling tools.

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