environments_get

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Get details,' implying a read operation, but lacks explicit statements about side effects, rate limits, or required permissions. The simplicity of the operation partially mitigates this, but the description misses an opportunity to be transparent about its non-destructive nature.

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 sentence of 8 words, efficiently conveying the tool's purpose without redundancy. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse.

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 simplicity of a get operation with three required parameters and no output schema, the description provides minimal context. It does not explain what 'details' includes or any error conditions. While sufficient for a straightforward GET, it lacks completeness for an agent to fully understand the response structure.

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 coverage is 100%, with each parameter having a brief description (e.g., 'The GTM account ID.'). The tool's description does not add any additional meaning or context for the parameters, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 ('Get') and the resource ('details of a specific GTM environment'). It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like environments_list (list all) and environments_create (create new), making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

No usage context is provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. It simply states what the tool does without any guidance on appropriate scenarios.

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