list_apks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It clearly states what the tool returns (APKs with versionCode and binary hashes) and scopes the operation to uploaded APKs only. It does not mention auth or error behavior, but for a read-only listing tool the disclosed output and scope are reasonably sufficient.

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 three short, purposeful sentences. It front-loads the core action and output, then gives alternative-tool guidance and downstream usage, with no filler or repetition.

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 low-complexity tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides the essential return fields, scope, and relationship to sibling tools. It offers enough context for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly without needing additional output documentation.

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 100%, so the package_name parameter is already documented in the schema. The description adds no new parameter-level semantics beyond referencing versionCode usage in a downstream tool, but that is output-related rather than parameter-related, so the high schema coverage keeps this at baseline.

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 ('List') and names a specific resource ('APKs uploaded for an app'), along with the key returned fields (versionCode and binary hashes). It also distinguishes from the closely related list_bundles tool by clarifying the APK-vs-bundle difference.

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?

It explicitly explains when to use this tool versus an alternative: 'use list_bundles for those' when apps ship bundles. It also provides downstream guidance by pointing the agent to use versionCode values with create_release, which helps with workflow selection.

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