get_deployment
Retrieve details and status of a specific deployment by providing its sys_id.
Instructions
Get details and status of a specific deployment
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sys_id | Yes | Deployment sys_id |
Retrieve details and status of a specific deployment by providing its sys_id.
Get details and status of a specific deployment
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sys_id | Yes | Deployment sys_id |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, such as response structure or side effects.
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?
Single sentence with no waste, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word earns its place.
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 read-only tool with one parameter and adequate annotations, the description is mostly complete. However, it could briefly mention common return fields (e.g., status, details) since no output schema exists.
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 input schema has 100% coverage, describing the sys_id parameter. The description does not add semantic detail beyond schema, meeting baseline expectations.
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 'Get details and status of a specific deployment' clearly states the action (get) and the resource (deployment), distinguishing it from siblings like list_deployments or track_deployment.
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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The name implies it is for a single deployment, but no when-not-to or alternative hints are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/tedorigawa001/ServiceNow-MCP'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server