list_environments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states the tool lists all environments (a read operation) but does not disclose behavior for invalid project_id, ordering, pagination, or error handling. The description is too brief to be informative.

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 concise with a clear structure (description, Args, Returns). It avoids fluff, though the Returns line redundantly repeats the purpose. Overall, it is well-organized and efficient.

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's simplicity (list environments, one parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential details. It could benefit from notes on ordering or behavior for invalid project_id, but it is largely complete for a straightforward listing operation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds minimal meaning by stating 'project_id: ID of the project,' clarifying the parameter's role beyond the schema's title and type. However, it does not provide format or constraints, so it is only marginally helpful.

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 all environments for a given project, using a specific verb ('list') and resource ('environments'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_environment (single) and create_environment (mutation).

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_environment for a single environment). The description implies usage via the required project_id but does not mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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