environment_update

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutating but non-destructive operation. The description adds that only display name or description are affected, which is useful behavioral context, though it does not disclose details like partial-update semantics or permission requirements.

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?

A single, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose without unnecessary detail. Every word earns its place.

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 simple metadata-update tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering the mutation profile, the description is nearly complete. It could note that at least one of displayName or description should be supplied, but the current phrasing largely implies this.

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 schema has 100% description coverage for all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the roles of displayName and description as the updatable fields, but adds little beyond what the schema already states.

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 states a specific verb (Update), a specific resource (environment), and the exact fields affected (display name or description). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like environment_update_definition and environment_delete.

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 gives clear context: it is for updating an environment's display name or description. It does not explicitly mention exclusions or route to environment_update_definition for other update scenarios, which would be the next step up.

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