Returns the macOS apps open in the Dock, the app currently in front, and apps that cannot be quit.
List the apps currently open (the ones shown in the Dock), which one is in front, and which can't be quit.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint=true annotation already establishes the safety profile, so the description's main added value is disclosing what information is returned (front app, non-quittable apps). It does not mention ordering, count limits, or whether results are a snapshot, which would be useful behavioral context beyond the annotations.
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 front-loaded sentence that names the resource first and then adds the specific returned details. No filler, no repetition of the tool name, nothing that does not earn its place.
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?
With no output schema, the description usefully compensates by describing what the listing contains. Combined with readOnlyHint, an agent has enough to call it correctly; only minor details (format/ordering of the list) are absent.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. There is no parameter syntax to explain, and the description correctly avoids inventing any.
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 ("List") and resource ("apps currently open"), and even clarifies the scope parenthetically ("the ones shown in the Dock"). It also enumerates the precise facts returned (front-most app, non-quittable apps), which clearly separates it from siblings like open_app, quit_app, and list_shortcuts.
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 implied rather than stated: an agent can infer this is the tool for inspecting currently running apps, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or pointer to alternatives such as open_app/quit_app. Adequate for a trivial no-arg query, but no real guidance is given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.