Resolve Variables

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the read-only nature. The description adds useful behavioral details like 'Secret values are masked' and the merging order, going beyond a simple verb phrase.

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, two sentences, and clearly structured. It front-loads the primary purpose and immediately adds the key nuance about scopes and masking.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description sets expectations for the return: the effective variable set, the scope per winning value, and the masking of secrets. This is sufficient for an agent to understand what will be returned.

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 provides a description for projectId and the tool description mentions 'one environment' for environmentId. While environmentId lacks an explicit schema description, its meaning is clear from the context and the sibling tools.

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 specific verb 'Show' and the resource 'effective variable set for one environment', distinguishing it from similar tools like get_environment_variables and export_variables by emphasizing the merged, resolved view.

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?

It explains when to use the tool ('This is what a test run or mock request actually sees') but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives such as get_environment_variables or list_personal_variables. The context is implied rather than explicitly stated.

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