app

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

No annotations provided, and the description merely lists actions without disclosing behavioral traits such as side effects, required permissions, or what each action entails. This leaves the agent without understanding of consequences or constraints.

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 a single short sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's scope. It is front-loaded with 'App lifecycle' and includes the key actions, earning its place without verbose text.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description should provide more details about each action's behavior and return values. Listing actions is insufficient for an agent to understand how to use the tool correctly in various scenarios.

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 80%, so the schema already explains most parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 the tool's purpose as managing app lifecycle with four specific actions: launch, stop, install, list. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which cover different domains (device, flow, etc.). However, the resource is implied rather than explicitly named.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While siblings are clearly different in scope, the description does not provide context for appropriate use cases or prerequisites.

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