rolldev_list_environments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It indicates a read operation (list), which is non-destructive. However, it does not specify authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects, but the explicit mention of 'returns structured JSON' clarifies the safe read nature.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently states the purpose and output. No redundant or extra information is present.

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?

Though the tool is simple with no parameters, the description lacks details about the output structure (e.g., fields like environment name or status) that would be helpful since there is no output schema. However, the main action and return type are covered, so it is minimally adequate.

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 zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% by default. According to the rules, a baseline of 4 applies. The description adds value by stating that the output includes directories and is structured JSON, which goes beyond the empty 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 specifies the action ('list') and resource ('running RollDev environments'), and mentions the return format ('structured JSON') and fields ('directories'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like rolldev_start_project or rolldev_db_query.

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 usage: use when you need to list running environments. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives among siblings, which is less critical for a simple list tool.

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