List Environments

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by stating the required OAuth scope, which is not captured in the annotations. The annotations already indicate the tool is read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description complements them well. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 concise (6 lines) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence serves a purpose: stating the action, listing requirements, defining parameters, and indicating return type. No extraneous information.

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?

Given that an output schema exists (not shown but indicated in context signals), the description appropriately covers the essential behavioral and parameter information. It mentions the required scope, explains all parameters, and notes the return type. The annotations cover safety and idempotency, making the description complete for effective use.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description effectively explains each parameter: repo_slug (required), workspace (optional with default), page_size (default 20), and max_pages (default 1, max recommended 10). This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's type and title information.

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's purpose: listing deployment environments for a repository. It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('deployment environments'), and the scope ('for a repository') distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_environment' (single environment) and 'list_deployments' (list deployments, not environments).

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 explicitly mentions the required OAuth scope ('deployment'), which is helpful for knowing prerequisites. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_environment' or 'list_deployments', though the context is clear enough for a knowledgeable user.

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