List environment groups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc. The description adds behavioral context such as the filtering behavior and the specific API endpoint (GET /env-groups). This goes beyond annotations by clarifying the HTTP method and that results vary based on filters.

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?

Three sentences, each contributing value: purpose, filter behavior, and API call. The first sentence is slightly redundant (repeats title) but overall efficient.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description explains the filtering logic and API method. It could mention the return format (array of env group objects) but is sufficient for a list operation with 9 optional parameters.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter described in the input schema. The description does not add new semantic meaning beyond 'matching the provided filters'. Baseline 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 explicitly states the action 'List' and the resource 'environment groups', and adds specificity about filters and default behavior (all if no filters). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'render_retrieve_env_group' by indicating it's a list operation.

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 clear context (listing env groups with filters) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives. No when-not or alternative tool mentions, though the purpose is clear enough.

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