get_env_vars

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the masking behavior for sensitive variables and the effect of include_values. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe any other behavioral traits like performance, authentication needs, or output format.

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, highly efficient. The main action is first, followed by key behavioral note (masking) and usage hint (include_values). 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?

For a listing tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and the only non-trivial parameter. Lacks details on output format or pagination, but these are not critical given the tool's simplicity.

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% with parameter descriptions. The description adds value by explaining the default masking of sensitive values and clarifying the effect of include_values beyond the schema's note. No further elaboration on projectName or serviceName.

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 a service, specifying that sensitive values are masked. It distinguishes from mutation siblings like set_env_var and delete_env_var, but does not explicitly differentiate from other retrieval tools like get_service_logs.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No prerequisites, exclusions, or context for when include_values should be used cautiously. The agent is left without decision support.

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