list_deployments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it lists deployments, without mentioning pagination, ordering, return format, or any potential access restrictions. This is minimal and lacks the depth needed for full transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the core function, making it easy to scan and understand.

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 list tool with clear schema parameters, the description covers the basic purpose but omits details like pagination, filtering, and the exact structure of the returned list. Since there is no output schema, the description could benefit from clarifying what the returned deployments look like, leaving it slightly incomplete but still minimally viable.

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 covers all three parameters (projectId, serviceId, environmentId) with simple 'The... ID' descriptions, and coverage is 100%. The description does not add any extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('List') and clearly identifies the resource ('deployments') and scope ('for a service in an environment'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_deployment (single deployment) or deploy_service (mutation). It is unambiguous and leaves no doubt about the tool's function.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_deployment or list_services. There are no explicit exclusions or mention of prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name and siblings.

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