app.list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the third_party semantics, but says nothing about ordering, result limits, or the return format beyond 'package names', leaving behavior under-specified for a list operation.

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 front-loaded sentence with no waste. It delivers purpose plus the key parameter constraint efficiently, though it is arguably terse to the point of missing usage context.

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 simple 2-param read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and the third_party switch adequately. It stops short of noting what the listing returns (full package list vs paginated) or its ordering.

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 only 50%; the filter param is documented in the schema while third_party is not. The description compensates by explaining 'third_party=true 仅用户应用' (only user apps), adding real meaning the schema lacks.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: '列出已安装应用包名' (list installed app package names). This is clearly distinct from siblings like app.launch, app.current, and app.stop, though it doesn't name them explicitly.

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?

No guidance on when to use this vs alternatives. The parenthetical explains third_party behavior but not the scenario in which listing apps is the right call over app.current or knowledge.list.

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