dero_tela_list_apps

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

Adds key behavioral details beyond annotations: first call triggers ~10s one-time scan (cached), powered by in-process scan, and index_meta discloses coverage. Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive, no contradiction.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (composite label, when to call, input requirements, output format). The description is relatively long but each part adds value; could be slightly trimmed without loss.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description fully describes the output structure and includes important context like caching, scan coverage, and related docs. Differentiates from all siblings and explains when to call it.

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% with both parameters well-documented. The description restates the schema's info (optional, case-insensitive, defaults) but does not add new semantic meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it lists/browses TELA apps discovered on-chain, specifies the fields returned (dURL, name, SCID, doc count), and distinguishes from siblings like dero_durl_to_scid and tela_inspect.

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?

Provides a 'When to call' section with explicit scenarios: exploring TELA ecosystem, searching by keyword, or finding SCID when dURL is unknown. Also mentions alternatives for exact dURL or inspecting specific SCID.

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