List env vars

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses a key behavior: secrets are masked by default. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema, though it does not detail auth requirements or the exact effect of showSecrets, which are not required for this simple read operation.

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 states the verb, resource, and scope directly. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple, and the description covers purpose and a key behavioral default. It does not detail return format, but for a listing tool that is implicit. No output schema exists, so the description does not need to elaborate on return values beyond what is stated.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates by clarifying 'for an application' for uuid and 'secrets masked by default' for showSecrets, implying that showSecrets controls whether secrets are revealed. This adds meaning to both parameters.

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 environment variables for an application. The verb 'List' and resource 'environment variables' are specific, and the scope 'for an application' distinguishes it from sibling tools like listEnvironments, which list environments rather than env vars.

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 context implies usage when one needs to see an application's environment variables, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives such as listEnvironments, nor any exclusions or conditions described.

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