trmnl_list_apps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotent/openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond them: the response is account-scoped and tells whether an active installation exists, which is the key behavioral detail for chaining into install/uninstall calls.

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?

Front-loaded with the action, followed by one clarifying sentence. The trailing 'TRMNL GET /api/apps' is API trivia that does little for tool selection, but it is short and costs little.

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?

A simple, non-destructive list tool with a fully described single parameter and no output schema; the description covers what the list contains and the account-scoping behavior. Pagination or result-size behavior is the only notable omission.

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?

Only one optional parameter (profile) and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents it fully. The description adds nothing about profile semantics (e.g., multi-account switching), so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('List the apps that can be installed') and clarifies the scope as the full platform catalog annotated with this account's installation status. That distinguishes it from trmnl_list_app_installations in substance, though the sibling is never named.

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 only implied: an agent can infer this is the discovery step before trmnl_install_app, but the description never says when to use it instead of trmnl_list_app_installations or trmnl_list_plugins, nor states any prerequisites.

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