list_envs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the tool lists environment variables, including sensitive ones like cookies and credentials, and supports optional filtering via searchValue. However, it does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation or describe what is returned, relying on the verb 'list' to imply non-destructive behavior.

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 two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the verb and resource, and adds the optional filter in a second concise sentence, making it appropriately sized and well-structured.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, resource, and filtering capability. It could optionally mention the return format or explicitly state read-only behavior, but for its complexity, the description is largely complete.

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 100%, with the schema already explaining that searchValue filters by name/remarks. The tool description only mentions 'Optionally filter with searchValue' without adding further meaning, so it does not significantly enhance the parameter documentation provided by the schema.

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 tool lists environment variables in Qinglong, using the specific verb 'list' and identifying the resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_env (which retrieves a single environment variable) and list_crons (which lists cron jobs) by the resource type and context.

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 implies use when you need to view environment variables, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_env. There is no mention of exclusions or when to prefer another tool, leaving usage guidance implied rather than explicit.

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