discover_environment

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool reports information, which implies a read-only, non-destructive operation. However, it does not disclose any potential side effects, access requirements, or whether the tool modifies state. The word 'Report' provides a baseline safety signal but lacks depth.

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 front-loads the action ('Report') and specifies the subject. It contains no filler or redundant information, making it appropriately sized for a tool with a simple purpose.

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 existence of an output schema, return values need not be described, but the description still leaves gaps. It does not explain the meaning of 'ExileAPI references' or 'source-plugin link', nor does it clarify the role of exileapi_root. For a tool with one parameter and no annotations, the description is too sparse to be fully actionable without external knowledge.

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 schema has one optional parameter (exileapi_root) with 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not mention this parameter at all. The description fails to explain what exileapi_root is, how it affects the report, or why a user might set it. With no schema descriptions and no compensation from the description, this dimension is severely lacking.

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's purpose: it reports local ExileAPI references and the source-plugin link for Build/Reload. The verb 'Report' and the specific resources ('local ExileAPI references', 'source-plugin link') make the function clear, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like prepare_reload.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it's for environment discovery before Build/Reload, but there is no explicit mention of prerequisites, alternatives, or exclusions. Sibling tools like prepare_reload are not referenced.

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