list_packages

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It accurately discloses the read-only nature of the operation ('lists') and the optional filtering behavior. While it does not detail return format or permissions, the simplicity of the operation makes the description adequate.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the main verb and object, and contains no filler. Every word contributes meaning, making it exceptionally concise and well-structured.

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 simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description gives enough context about what it does and how filtering works. It does not explain the exact output format, but that is not critical for such a straightforward operation.

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?

The input schema already provides full coverage (100%) with the 'query' parameter description. The tool description repeats the filtering concept without adding new detail about syntax or behavior, so it neither enhances nor contradicts the schema, staying at the baseline.

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 the specific verb 'lists' with the resource 'installed Android application packages on the device', making the tool's function immediately clear. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like list_databases and execute_query, which operate on databases rather than packages.

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 description clearly implies when to use the tool: when listing installed Android packages, with an optional query filter. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state exclusion criteria, but the context of sibling tools makes the intended use obvious.

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