list_secrets_in_environment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the operation (listing) but does not disclose read-only behavior, authorization requirements, rate limits, or any side effects. Since it is a simple list operation, the lack of such details is acceptable but not exemplary.

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, concise sentence of 7 words with no redundant information. It is front-loaded and immediately clear. No wasted content.

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 list operation with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose but could be enhanced by mentioning the return format (e.g., array of secret objects) or how to obtain the required slugs. However, given the simplicity and sibling context, it is minimally adequate.

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 input schema covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema already provides clarity; no extra context needed.

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 explicitly states 'Lists all secrets within a specific environment', clearly identifying the action (lists) and the resource (secrets filtered by environment). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_secrets (which likely lists all secrets without environment filter) and list_variables_in_environment (different resource).

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 implies usage: use when you need to retrieve secrets for a particular environment, as indicated by the required parameters (projectSlug, environmentSlug). It does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., preferring list_secrets for unfiltered access), but the context of sibling names provides that inference.

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