timeweb_list_app_deploys

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. 'List' implies a read-only operation, but there is no mention of read-only guarantees, pagination behavior, ordering, or response structure. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. No superfluous words or redundant phrasing.

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?

The tool is a simple list operation, and the schema documents parameters well, but the description omits details about the return format, pagination behavior, and relation to deployment lifecycle. Without an output schema, some context would be helpful.

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%, so all parameters (app_id, limit, offset, format) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific information, meeting the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 'List deployment history for a PaaS application' uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('deployment history') with clear scope ('for a PaaS application'). It distinguishes itself well from siblings like timeweb_deploy_app (creation) and timeweb_get_deploy_logs (logs of a single deploy).

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 its use case (retrieving deployment history) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like timeweb_get_app or timeweb_get_deploy_logs. No exclusions or alternative mentions are present.

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