hamravesh_update_app_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 discloses critical behavior: the tool replaces the entire given arrays (not incremental update), is disabled by default, and supports dry-run. However, it does not specify authentication requirements, error handling, or idempotency. The disclosed traits are significant but not exhaustive.

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 well-structured: purpose first, then parameter details, then cautionary notes. It is somewhat verbose but each sentence adds value. It could be slightly trimmed, but overall it is efficient and front-loaded.

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 tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately covers the necessary context: it explains the replacement behavior, the disabled state, the dry-run option, and references the related read tool. This provides sufficient completeness for an agent to use the tool safely.

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 coverage is 50%, and the description adds meaning by explaining the format of envs and secret_envs as arrays of {name, value} objects and stating that at least one of them is required. This goes beyond the schema's required field (only app_id). However, it does not describe the org parameter or provide additional syntax details for the arrays.

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 it updates environment variables of an app, distinguishing between normal and secret envs. It specifies the format and that at least one of the two arrays must be provided. This verb+resource purpose is distinct from sibling tools like hamravesh_get_app and hamravesh_scale_app.

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 explicitly advises to first use hamravesh_get_app to see the current state, warns that the call replaces the entire arrays (not merge), and notes the tool is disabled by default requiring HAMRAVESH_ALLOW_WRITE=1. It also mentions dry-run capability. These provide clear when-to-use and what-to-avoid guidance.

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