listEnvironments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. The description only states 'List environments' with no information about whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are required, whether results are paginated (though parameters suggest they are), rate limits, or what the response contains. For a tool with 12 parameters and no annotation coverage, this is completely inadequate.

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?

While technically concise with 'List environments' as the main description, this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The inclusion of the parameter list with 'No description' for each parameter adds bulk without value. The structure is poor - the response example shows generic JSON without explaining what environment data looks like, making the overall description inefficient despite its brevity.

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 the complexity (12 parameters, no annotations, no schema descriptions) and the existence of an output schema, the description is completely inadequate. While the output schema might document return values, the description fails to explain what 'environments' are, how filtering works, when to use pagination parameters, or any behavioral aspects. For a listing tool with extensive filtering capabilities, this leaves the agent with insufficient context.

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% (none of the 12 parameters have descriptions in the schema), and the description provides no meaningful parameter information beyond listing parameter names. The description includes a 'Query Parameters' section that merely repeats parameter names with 'No description' for each, adding zero semantic value. This fails to compensate for the complete lack of 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 states 'List environments' which is a tautology that merely restates the tool name. It doesn't specify what an 'environment' is in this context (development, staging, production environments?) or what information is included in the listing. While the verb 'list' is clear, the resource 'environments' lacks context, making the purpose vague.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple sibling tools with 'list' prefixes (listAlerts, listIncidents, listServices, etc.), but the description doesn't differentiate this tool from those or indicate when filtering environments is appropriate versus using other listing tools. The description provides zero usage context.

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