list_environments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the two traits that matter here: 'Read-only' and 'never credentials,' which reassures the agent that invoking it is safe and that secrets are not exposed. It does not mention auth requirements or whether the environment list can change at runtime, but for a simple enumeration tool this is solid coverage.

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?

Three short sentences, all front-loaded and each earning its place: what it lists, what it returns, and how to use the result. No filler or redundancy.

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 must describe the return shape, and it does ('name and non-secret connection info, never credentials'). Combined with the read-only disclosure and the env-routing hint, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline is 4. It usefully clarifies that the output feeds the `env` parameter of sibling tools, which is the only argument-related information relevant here.

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 and resource ('List configured database environments') and immediately scopes what is returned (name and non-secret connection info). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_schemas and list_tables, which operate inside an environment rather than enumerating environments themselves.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent how to use the output: 'Use the returned names as the `env` argument to other tools,' which is the key routing guidance for this discovery tool. It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use or a named alternative, but for a zero-param discovery call the contextual guidance is strong.

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