apk_preview_list_apps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds scoping context ('third-party packages', 'active emulator') but reveals no additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

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, direct sentence conveys the tool's purpose and scope with no filler or redundancy. Every word contributes to understanding.

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 no parameters, simple tool behavior, existing annotations, and an output schema, the description is complete. It states the exact scope ('third-party packages') and the required context ('active emulator') needed for correct invocation.

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?

There are zero parameters and schema coverage is complete, so the schema places no burden on the description. A baseline of 4 applies for a no-parameter tool; the description adequately defines what the tool returns without needing parameter explanations.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('third-party packages') and context ('in active emulator'). It clearly differentiates from siblings like apk_preview_list_avds and apk_preview_install_apk by scope.

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 context 'in active emulator' implies that this tool is for retrieving installed apps in a running emulator session, and the act of listing installed packages suggests when it would be useful. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use it.

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