attach_environmentActivate a saved environment so future captures and replays resolve variables against it; use list_environments to find the environment ID.
Activate an environment so subsequent captures and replays resolve variables against it. Use list_environments to discover ids.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Environment id from list_environments. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare idempotent, non-destructive, non-read-only state, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the crucial behavioral fact beyond annotations: this is a persistent activation that alters how later captures and replays behave. It doesn't say whether a prior environment is replaced or how activation is undone.
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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the effect and followed by the discovery hint. No filler.
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?
For a one-parameter state toggle with full schema coverage and no output schema, this is nearly complete. The one omission is how the activation is cleared or replaced, which an agent might need, but no detach sibling exists to reference.
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 coverage is 100%, and the single id parameter is fully documented there. The description only reinforces the source of the id via list_environments, adding little beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb (activate) on a specific resource (environment) and explains the effect: subsequent captures and replays resolve variables against it. This clearly differentiates it from the discovery sibling list_environments, which is named outright.
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?
Gives the operative context (use before captures/replays that need variable resolution) and routes discovery to list_environments. It lacks explicit when-not guidance or a way to detach/reset, so it stops short of a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.