list_environments

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the disclosure burden. The verb 'List' conveys non-mutating behavior and the parenthetical documents the returned fields, but it does not mention potential caveats such as pagination, large result sets, or permission requirements. For a simple, parameterless list tool this is a moderate but acceptable transparency level.

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 one concise sentence that front-loads the action and scope, with the field list provided as a compact parenthetical. Every word earns its place and there is no redundancy.

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 zero-parameter list operation with an output schema available, the description covers the operation, scope, and returned fields. An agent has enough information to select and invoke the tool correctly without missing essential context.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline for this dimension is 4. The description adds value by clarifying what each environment entry includes (id, name, slug, group, default flag), which indirectly confirms that no input beyond the implicit tenant scope is needed.

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 verb and resource: 'List all environments in the tenant' and enumerates the returned fields (id, name, slug, group, default flag). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_environment_groups, which target a different resource type, and from create/update/delete_environment.

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 gives clear context by specifying the scope ('all environments in the tenant') and implies a read-only listing operation. It does not explicitly name alternatives or provide exclusion conditions, but the intent is unambiguous given the sibling tool set.

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