iphone_list_apps

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden, and it does establish this as a non-destructive listing that returns app names and bundle IDs. It says nothing about permissions, device-connection requirements, or whether the list is truncated, which matters for a device-bridge tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 short sentences with the resource and return content front-loaded and the flag behavior second. Nothing is wasted and nothing essential is buried.

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 one-parameter read-only listing this is nearly sufficient: the return shape is described in prose despite no output schema, and the only parameter is explained. Missing device-state prerequisites or output ordering, which is a minor gap for such a simple tool.

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 0% for the single parameter, so the description must compensate — and it does, explaining that include_system=True adds system apps, implicitly defining the default false case as user apps only. It could have stated the default explicitly, but the meaning is recoverable.

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 (list installed apps) and even specifies the returned fields (name and Bundle ID), which lets an agent distinguish it from mutating siblings like iphone_launch_app or iphone_terminate_app. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 use case is implied — enumerate apps so an agent can pick one to launch or terminate — but the description never says when to call it versus iphone_status or iphone_launch_app, nor any prerequisites. The only explicit conditional guidance concerns the include_system flag.

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