List environment modules

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the 'login node' scope and mentions the dual list/search functionality, but does not explain search semantics or output format, which would be valuable beyond 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that directly states purpose and scope. No redundant or filler content; every word 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?

Despite its simplicity, the description lacks explicit details on return values or parameter behavior, and there is no output schema to compensate. It is minimally viable but leaves gaps for an agent to know what to expect when invoking the tool.

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 only indirectly implies the 'query' parameter via the word 'search', without explaining format, wildcard support, or case sensitivity. This is insufficient for a parameter-heavy tool, even with one parameter.

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 or searches environment modules available on the login node. This specific verb+resource combination (list/search modules) distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_jobs or list_files.

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: if you need to know which environment modules are available, use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, leaving room for ambiguity among sibling list tools.

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