desktop_applications

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description correctly avoids repeating that. It adds value by noting it works while input is paused and describing the return value (application_id and file/URI support), which are not in annotations.

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 two sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, and the usage hint is succinct. Every sentence contributes useful information without 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?

With no output schema, the description appropriately mentions it returns application_id and file/URI support. It also provides the paused-input context, which is useful. It lacks details on limit behavior, but for a simple search tool, it is largely complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that query can search by name, description or ID, giving meaning to the query parameter. However, it does not explain the 'limit' parameter, leaving a gap in understanding.

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 a verb 'find' and a resource 'installed desktop applications', with search fields (name, description, ID). It also notes it returns application_id and file/URI support, and hints at use with desktop_launch, which helps differentiate it from other siblings.

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 explicitly says 'Use an exact returned ID with desktop_launch', giving a clear usage path. It also mentions it works while input is paused, providing a contextual condition. However, it does not specify when not to use it or compare with alternatives.

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