cisco_umbrella_list_applications

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List' and lists parameters, but does not describe pagination behavior (e.g., default limit, max results), response structure, or any side effects beyond it being a read operation.

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 well-structured with a one-line summary, API endpoint, and a clear list of args. It is concise and free of extraneous information, though the API line is somewhat redundant with the tool name.

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 list operation with an output schema, the description covers all parameters and the core purpose, but lacks usage guidance and behavioral details like pagination defaults. The output schema presumably covers return values, so the description is reasonably complete.

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 eight parameters are described with meaningful detail beyond the schema, including value formats (comma-separated, boolean), examples (sources: 'dns,swg,cdfw'), and semantics (limit as max results per page). Since schema coverage is 0%, this description fully compensates.

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 'List discovered cloud applications (App Discovery).' with a clear verb and resource, and includes the API endpoint. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_application_categories or get_activity_*.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as activity reporting or category listing. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or 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.