pier_get_env_vars

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the safety burden. 'Read' clearly signals a non-mutating operation, and 'full set' communicates the expected response scope. It does not detail return format or error behavior, but for a simple getter this is sufficient disclosure.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes: 'Read' states the action, 'full set' states the scope, and 'environment variables for an app' states the resource.

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 tool with one required integer parameter, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It identifies the target, the read-only nature, and the full-set result. A note about the exact return structure or error behavior would be extra but is not essential for correct selection and invocation.

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 100%, and the appId parameter is already documented as 'The numeric ID of the app.' The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Read'), a specific resource ('environment variables'), and a clear scope ('full set for an app'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like pier_set_env_vars and pier_update_env_var through the read-only action and full-collection scope.

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 use case is implied: use this tool when you need to read all environment variables for an app. However, there is no explicit when-not-to-use guidance, named alternatives, or mention of using set/update when modification is needed.

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