dataverse_get_environment_variables

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the annotations, including the fallback to defaultvalue when value is null, the order of name lookup (schema name first, then display name), and the scoping mechanism via componenttype 380. No contradictions with annotations.

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 well-structured, starting with the main purpose, then detailing output structure and parameter usage. It is concise for the amount of information conveyed, with no unnecessary repetition.

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 that an output schema exists and the tool has few required parameters, the description provides enough detail about output format, parameter interactions, and edge cases (null value) to use the tool effectively. Minor gaps around pagination are covered by the schema.

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 itself already describes each parameter, and the tool description reinforces key rules about mutual exclusivity and lookup order. However, it does not add new information for parameters like top or dataverse_url, and the low schema coverage (0%) means more responsibility on the description, which it partially meets.

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 tool lists environment variable definitions with their current values, and distinguishes itself from similar tools (e.g., dataverse_get_environment_variable_values) by detailing the merged output structure. It uses specific verbs and resources.

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 clear guidance on when to use the name parameter versus solution scoping, and explicitly states that name cannot be combined with solution parameters. It does not directly compare with sibling tools, but the context is sufficient for correct usage.

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