list_environments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds the 'every' and 'signed-in account' scope, which complements the openWorldHint by clarifying the visibility boundary, but does not go into details like pagination or environment properties.

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 clear sentence with zero waste; the key scoping ('every', 'signed-in account') is front-loaded. Perfectly sized for a no-parameter list tool.

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 description is sufficient for a simple list operation, but the lack of an output schema and absence of any mention of return format or filtering capabilities leaves minor gaps. However, given the simplicity, it is adequately complete.

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 tool has 0 parameters; the schema is empty with 100% coverage, so there is nothing to document. The description adds no parameter meaning, but with no params, this is a baseline high score.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists every Power Platform environment visible to the signed-in account—a specific verb (list) and resource (environments). It distinguishes from siblings like list_flows which target a different resource type, though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling for comparison.

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 and 'signed-in account' context imply it's for browsing available environments, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives among siblings. It's clear enough for obvious cases but lacks explicit routing.

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