Update an environment

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond 'Authorization class: board_or_agent'. It does not explain the partial update semantics (PATCH) or what fields are updated.

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 only two sentences long, which is efficient but too brief to cover necessary details. It wastes no words but lacks critical information about parameters and behavior.

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 tool has many optional fields in the body and no output schema provided, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what each body parameter does, any constraints, or the effect of a PATCH update. Only the authorization class is useful.

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%, meaning the description does not explain any of the parameters. The body object has many fields (name, config, driver, status, envVars, etc.) but the description provides no context about their meaning or usage.

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 'Update an environment' with the specific HTTP verb PATCH, distinguishing this tool from create (POST), read (GET), and delete (DELETE) environment tools in the sibling list.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pc_get_environments_by_id or pc_post_companies_by_company_id_environments. It only repeats the title and adds operation details.

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