list_environment_scopes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the read-oriented listing behavior and required environmentId, but does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, mention permission requirements, or describe error/empty-result behavior. 'List' implies read-only but the description does not confirm it.

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, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, followed by the parameter requirement and output format. No filler or 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?

For a simple one-parameter list tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the essential invocation details: purpose, required parameter, parameter format, and response presentation. It leaves minor gaps such as exact returned fields and error behavior, but these are not critical for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does by explaining that environmentId is required and giving the expected format 'env_<number>'. This adds real meaning beyond the bare schema pattern, though the format is slightly more specific than the schema's ^env_\w+$ pattern.

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 states a specific action ('List all scopes') and identifies the resource and scope ('in the specified environment'), so an agent can distinguish it from sibling tools such as list_environment_roles or create_environment_scope.

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 implies when to use the tool: when you need the full set of scopes for a given environment. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools like list_environment_roles, so guidance is only implicit.

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