Cursor: list environments

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the useful failure behavior 'Without one, reports why the authority is unavailable,' but the term 'authority' is somewhat vague and little else is disclosed beyond the annotations.

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?

Two short sentences deliver the core action and the key failure case with no wasted words. The primary operation is front-loaded, making the description easy to scan.

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?

With a single optional parameter, full schema coverage, an output schema, and safety-relevant annotations, the description covers the prerequisite and fallback behavior. The only minor gap is the ambiguous phrase 'authority,' which could be clearer, but nothing essential for invoking the tool is missing.

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 covers the only parameter fully with a description and enum values, so the description does not need to add parameter detail. The tool description provides no additional insight into the `scope` parameter, earning the baseline score for high schema coverage.

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 names the operation ('List saved cloud environments') and the required mechanism ('configured Cursor CLI'). It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling list tools, relying on the resource name for differentiation, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

It communicates the prerequisite of a configured Cursor CLI and explains what happens when that prerequisite is missing. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but for a simple list operation with distinct sibling tool names, the usage context is reasonably clear.

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