Contract Testing: List Environments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating safe read-only behavior. The description adds no new behavioral details beyond confirming it retrieves environments. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate but does not disclose potential pagination, sorting, or return format.

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 very concise—one sentence plus a toolset label. No wasted words. However, it could be slightly more structured with additional context (e.g., return fields) without becoming verbose. Still efficient and clear.

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 simple list operation with no parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally complete. It identifies the workspace but does not mention what information is returned (e.g., environment names, IDs) or if there is pagination. With no output schema, some description of the return format would improve completeness.

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?

There are no parameters (0 params, schema coverage 100%). The description explicitly states 'Parameters: None', which satisfies the need. No additional clarification is required, so a baseline of 4 applies.

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 clearly states 'Retrieve all environments', which is a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'contract-testing_get_environment' (single) and 'contract-testing_create/delete/update_environment' by explicitly indicating it returns all environments.

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 specifies the context 'configured in the Pact Broker or PactFlow workspace' but does not provide when to use this vs. alternatives like 'contract-testing_get_environment' for a single environment. No exclusions or when-not-to-use are given, but the purpose is clear enough for basic selection.

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