List test databases

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

The description is consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation, indicating a read-only operation. It does not describe side effects or edge cases, but for a simple listing tool, the readOnlyHint covers the primary behavioral expectation. The description adds a useful qualifier about excluding connection strings.

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 a single, concise sentence that packs all necessary information: action, resource, and a notable exclusion. No superfluous wording.

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 parameterless listing operation, the description sufficiently covers what the tool returns (list of test environments) and what it does not include (connection strings). It gives enough context for an agent to decide when to use it, especially given the sibling tools list.

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?

The tool has no parameters, so there is no additional semantic burden. The schema coverage is trivially complete, and the description needs no parameter explanations.

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 the action 'List' and the specific resource 'test environments', with qualifiers 'active isolated real' to distinguish from other test-related entities. It is unambiguous and distinct from sibling list tools such as list_projects or list_hosts.

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 purpose is straightforward for a listing operation. The mention of 'without connection strings' implicitly warns that this tool does not provide credentials, hinting that a complementary tool (e.g., acquire_test_database) may be needed for full context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or conditions for use.

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