getEnvironments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds minimal behavioral context by linking to external documentation for 'environments', but doesn't disclose operational details like rate limits, authentication needs, or response format. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Gets information about all of your environments') and includes a helpful external link without unnecessary elaboration. Every word serves a clear purpose, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 the tool's low complexity (1 optional parameter), rich annotations (read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on usage context, parameter implications, or behavioral nuances, leaving gaps for an agent to infer correct 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%, with the 'workspace' parameter fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond implying it retrieves 'your' environments, which might hint at ownership but doesn't clarify the parameter's use. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Gets information') and resource ('all of your environments'), making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from sibling 'getEnvironment' (singular) by specifying 'all' environments. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with other list-like tools like 'getCollections' or 'getWorkspaces' beyond the resource type.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to use 'getEnvironments' vs 'getEnvironment' (singular), nor does it explain the optional 'workspace' parameter's role in filtering. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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