iphone_list_apps

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the return shape (name + Bundle ID) and the effect of include_system=True, but it says nothing about whether the call is read-only, how long it takes, whether pagination or a result cap applies, or what an empty result means.

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, zero filler, with the core purpose front-loaded and the parameter note following. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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 single-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, this covers what it does, what it returns, and the one flag's behavior. Missing only a note on result volume or ordering, which is minor at this complexity.

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 0% — the boolean parameter has no description in the schema — so the sentence 'include_system=True 时列出系统 App' is the only source of meaning. It successfully explains the flag and, by implication, that the default excludes system apps, though it does not spell out that default explicitly.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('列出已安装的 App') and names the returned fields (名字和 Bundle ID), so an agent can tell it apart from action siblings like iphone_launch_app or iphone_list_elements. It never explicitly contrasts itself with those siblings, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent infers it should call this before iphone_launch_app to discover Bundle IDs. There is no explicit 'use this when...' statement, no mention of when to prefer iphone_list_elements, and no prerequisite notes.

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