zadig_environment_service_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'List' clearly signals a read-only enumeration with no side effects, which is useful. However, it does not disclose how production or project_key affect scope, nor any pagination/ordering behavior, leaving the behavioral profile partially underspecified.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core action, with zero wasted words. It loses a point because its brevity leaves out operationally important context that an agent would need for correct invocation.

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?

Given no annotations, three parameters, and several semantically overlapping sibling tools, a single sentence is not enough for reliable tool selection and use. Missing are explicit read-only assurance, when to prefer this tool over siblings, and the meaning of production and roject_key in the list operation.

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 0%, and the description adds almost no parameter meaning beyond the schema titles. It only hints at env_name via 'in a Zadig environment', while production and project_key remain unexplained. The description fails to compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 a precise resource ('services deployed in a Zadig environment'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It also distinguishes itself from siblings like zadigg_environment_list and zadigg_environment_service_get by naming the deployed services scope.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus closely related siblings such as zadigg_environment_service_get, zadigg_environment_service_apply, or zadigg_environment_service_delete. Any usage context is only implied by the word 'List', not stated.

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