get_environment_variable

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the redaction behavior ('[REDACTED]' with `masked: true`), which is exactly the kind of trait annotations would otherwise cover, but says nothing about error behavior for missing variables, permissions, or session scoping.

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?

Two tight sentences, zero filler, with the read purpose front-loaded and the redaction caveat immediately after. Nothing needs trimming or moving.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description partially covers the return shape via `masked: true` and explains the source of values. It is nearly complete for a simple single-value read, though it omits failure behavior for unset or unknown variable names.

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 only 50%: workspaceRoot is documented in the schema, but `name` has no description anywhere. The description adds no semantics for the parameter—no key format, case sensitivity, or match rules against the set key—so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

Specific verb+resource: 'Read a session variable'. It also disambiguates from the sibling setter by naming 'set_environment_variable' and 'capture' as the producers of the value, so an agent can route correctly without opening the schema.

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?

Usage is implied by naming the setting tools as the source of the value, which suggests reading after capture/set. But there is no explicit when/when-not guidance (e.g., what to do if the variable was never set, or whether a workspace-scoped read differs).

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