upsert_environment

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. Discloses upsert behavior and side effect of setting active environment, but does not explain update semantics (e.g., replace vs. merge variables), error conditions, or return value. Lacks detail on what 'set active' actually entails.

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?

Single sentence is concise, but could benefit from bullet points or structured explanation. Still, it is efficient with no wasted words.

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?

Without output schema or annotations, the description should cover more. Missing information on return value, update behavior, error scenarios, and complete parameter details. Adequate only for the most trivial use case.

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%, yet description only vaguely explains 'variables' with an example, missing details on the 'enabled' subfield and the required structure. 'setActive' is implied but not explicitly connected to the parameter name. Adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states 'Create or update an environment' with examples, and implies upsert behavior via 'Matched by name'. However, lacks explicit differentiation from sibling tools like get_active_environment, which reduces clarity.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Mentions optional activation for send_request, but does not specify scenarios where other tools (e.g., upsert_request) would be more appropriate.

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