create_environment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only indicates a creation action but omits details like whether creation is idempotent, if duplicate names are allowed, or if conflicts (e.g., port already in use) are handled. This leaves the agent uncertain about 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?

The description is a single, concise sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose. Every word is meaningful, with no unnecessary information. It is front-loaded and 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 creation tool with no output schema or annotations, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., created environment object), potential errors, or integration with sibling tools (e.g., listing or starting the environment). This leaves gaps for the agent to infer.

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 already covers both parameters (name, port) with descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate. No additional constraints or formatting hints are provided.

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 'Create a new Mockoon environment' clearly states the verb 'create' and the resource 'environment', making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like delete_environment, list_environments, etc., by specifying creation.

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 prerequisites (e.g., need to create environment before routes) or context (e.g., if environment creation is a prerequisite for starting a server). This absence of usage context reduces utility.

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