allow_app

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds the key detail that changes take effect within seconds due to a daemon heartbeat reload, which is useful operational context. It does not disclose permissions, error cases, or list overwrite behavior, but the provided timing detail is meaningful.

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?

Two sentences with no filler: the first states the action and parameter, the second provides behavioral context. Every word earns its place, and the most important information leads.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one required parameter) and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, parameter, and effect. It omits explicit reference to deny_app, but the core details needed to invoke the tool are present.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that the bundle_id is the app identifier and supplies a concrete example ('com.apple.Safari'), adding value beyond the schema's generic 'Bundle Id' label. For a single-parameter tool this is sufficient.

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 a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('capture allowlist'), and identifies the parameter as a bundle identifier with an example. This clearly differentiates the tool from its sibling deny_app and makes its function immediately obvious.

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 states what the tool does but does not explicitly mention when to use it versus alternatives like deny_app. The sibling context implies a complementary relationship, but the description itself offers no direct usage guidance or exclusions.

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