Discover Bruno environments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a meaningful behavioral trait — secret values are not returned — which is useful data-safety context. However, it does not confirm the operation is read-only, mention side effects, error behavior, or traversal limits.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the return payload front-loaded before the secret-value caveat. Nothing that could be cut.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description correctly spells out the return shape (sibling directory, environment names, variable names) and the secret-value exclusion. It is nearly complete for a single-parameter read tool; only the read-only/no-side-effect confirmation is missing.

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?

Single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents the collection path and the sibling-environments lookup. The description restates the directory behavior but adds no format or syntax detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 for full coverage.

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?

States a specific verb (inspect) and resource (folder structure around a Bruno collection) and enumerates the return payload: environments directory, environment names, variable names. Sibling differentiation is not explicit, but the resource is distinct from list-collections/run-collection.

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 reach for this tool versus siblings like list-collections or run-collection. The purpose implies a discovery step before a run, but nothing states it, and there are no exclusions or prerequisites.

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