Analyze App Usage & Memory

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint. The description adds valuable behavioral details: it does not uninstall, it flags candidates, reports savings, and groups duplicates. It also warns about background logic. No contradictions.

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 relatively long but well-structured, with each sentence adding value. It could be slightly shorter, but it remains clear and informative.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description fully explains the tool's output: flags removal candidates, reports potential savings, and groups duplicates. It covers all necessary contextual information.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. Baseline is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter info. No issues.

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 cross-references installed apps against RAM usage, device count, and flow references, and flags removal candidates. This specific verb-resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_apps or get_memory_info.

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 explicitly states it is read-only and advisory, and includes a caveat about background logic. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use instructions or alternative tools, but the context is clear enough for typical use.

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