list_apps

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the operation (list), the scope ('user's'), and the returned state fields, which is sufficient for a simple read-only list tool. It could be more explicit about side-effect-free behavior or result format, but 'List' plus the data description is a clear behavioral statement.

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?

Two compact sentences: the first lists what the tool returns, and the second states its primary use. No filler or repetition; the content is front-loaded.

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 parameterless list tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it names the resource, the user scope, the returned fields, and the recommended entry-point usage. An agent has everything it needs to select and call this tool correctly.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter meanings to document. This matches the baseline for a parameterless tool.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List the user's SnapDeploy containers' and enumerates the exact data returned (status, URL, plan, deploy-limit, free-hours, ids/names). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list_repos, get_deployments, and check_quota.

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?

'Start here to find container ids/names' gives explicit guidance that this is the entry point for container operations. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the context is clear enough for selection.

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