Vercel connector deploy create/read authority split and hidden deploy schema

[TeaShaman-cyber]

Summary

The Vercel connector can return a successful-looking preview deployment receipt from deploy_to_vercel, while the connector's project/deployment read actions cannot resolve the same object in the same confirmed team scope.

There is also a tool-schema mismatch: the exposed deploy_to_vercel schema presents no arguments, while the runtime backend requires target, name, and files[] with file/data strings.

Environment

• Vercel team: semyon-s-nakama
• Plan: Hobby
• Team scope resolved via list_teams
• Observed: 2026-09-03

Minimal reproduction

1. list_projects(team) -> []
2. Call deploy_to_vercel for a preview deployment.
3. Runtime validation reveals hidden required fields: target, name, files.
4. Submit a minimal valid preview deployment.
5. Connector returns deployment ID + hostname.
6. Read back via the same confirmed team scope.

Observed for the full canary deployment:

• deployment ID: dpl_Bomj4zS4ym4x4JHwTJ8cexdVSijx
• hostname: vercel-ci-watcher-canary-c0c30o4ry-semyon-s-nakama.vercel.app
• list_projects(team id) -> []
• list_projects(team slug) -> []
• get_project("vercel-ci-watcher-canary", team) -> 404
• get_deployment(deployment id, team) -> 404
• get_deployment(hostname, team) -> 404
• build-log readback -> 404

Expected

A deployment returned by the connector create path should be resolvable by connector read paths under the same authorized team, or the connector should explicitly document/return a different authority/scope.

The public tool schema should also expose the arguments required by the runtime backend.

Public evidence

Sanitized full reproduction and field notes:
TeaShaman-cyber/vercel-cookbook#4

Canary checkpoint:
TeaShaman-cyber/vercel-cookbook#1 (comment)

Current classification on our side: INCONCLUSIVE_CONNECTOR_BOUNDARY, not runtime failure, because create and read surfaces disagree about the object state.