list_desktop_apps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered and the bar is lower. The description adds little beyond the resource: it says 'all' installed apps while the schema defaults limit to 30, and it never mentions the cap, ordering, or that results are truncated unless a limit is passed — a gap worth flagging for a 'list all' claim.

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?

A single short sentence with the resource front-loaded and the filter hint in parentheses. It earns its space, though the 'all' vs. default-limit tension is a minor structural imprecision.

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 two-optional-parameter read-only list tool with full schema coverage and safety annotations, the description covers what is needed to call it. The only substantive omission is clarifying that 'all' is bounded by the default limit of 30.

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%, so both parameters are already documented. The description still reinforces the filter semantics by noting results are 'filterable by name', which tells the agent the filter is a substring match on app name — a small value-add over the schema, fitting a 4 rather than the baseline 3.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'List all installed .desktop applications'. The word 'installed' implicitly separates it from list_running_apps, but it never names siblings like launch_app, list_running_apps, or list_installed_packages to make that distinction explicit.

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?

Usage is implied by 'installed' (as opposed to running apps) and the parenthetical note about name filtering. There is no explicit guidance on when to pick this over list_running_apps or when to follow up with launch_app, so the agent has to infer the routing.

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