rolldev_list_environments

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool's read-only nature (listing) and output format (structured JSON), but lacks details on behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or error handling. The description doesn't contradict annotations (none exist).

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('List all running RollDev environments') and includes essential details (directories, JSON output) without waste. Every element earns its place.

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 low complexity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is reasonably complete for a listing operation. It covers purpose and output format, though it could benefit from more behavioral context (e.g., permissions or limitations). No output schema exists, so describing return values is appropriate.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description adds value by specifying what the tool returns (environments with directories in JSON format), which goes beyond the empty schema. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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 specific action ('List all running RollDev environments') and resource ('RollDev environments'), including the scope ('with their directories') and output format ('returns structured JSON'). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on listing environments rather than operations like starting/stopping projects or executing commands.

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 when needing to list running environments with directory information, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., no comparison to sibling tools like rolldev_start_project or rolldev_stop_svc). It lacks exclusions or prerequisites.

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