List Environments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that – no note on listing scope, default page size, sorting behavior, or what an open-world list returns.

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?

It is short, but brevity here reflects under-specification rather than conciseness – the single four-word phrase earns nothing and leaves all substantive behavior unstated.

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 24 optional parameters with no schema descriptions and no output-schema guidance needed, the description is wholly inadequate; an agent cannot construct a correct paginated/filtered query from this text. The only safety context comes from annotations, not the description.

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?

All 24 parameters have 0% schema description coverage and the description supplies no explanation of sort, include, page_size, page_number, or the many filter_* variants. An agent has no basis for choosing between filter_name, filter_name_eq, filter_name_in, or filter_name_not_in.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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?

There is no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_environment, create_environment, or update_environment, nor any mention of prerequisites or pagination strategy. Usage must be entirely inferred from the name.

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