app_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It only mentions listing and filtering, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as permissions needed, whether this is a read-only operation, or potential side effects.

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 concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose and key options. No unnecessary words or redundant 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?

The description lacks information about the return format (e.g., list of package names or details), ordering, or pagination. Given the absence of an output schema and annotations, the agent may not know what to expect from the tool's response.

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?

All three parameters ('filter', 'system', 'serial') are described in the input schema with full coverage. The description adds minimal value by reiterating the filter and system options, but does not explain the 'serial' parameter or provide further details beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool lists installed packages on the device, with optional filtering by name or type (system/third-party). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like app_install or app_start which perform different actions.

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 implies usage when needing to list packages, but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use this tool versus alternatives. No comparison with siblings like app_current or ui_find_element is given.

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