List launchable apps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safe read-only profile is covered. The description adds that entries are friendly name -> link pairs, which is modestly beyond annotations, but since an output schema exists it largely restates return content rather than behavior.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste; the purpose and the launch_app linkage appear immediately.

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 zero-parameter, read-only discovery tool with an output schema and covering annotations, nearly everything needed to call it is present. The only omission is an explicit statement of the intended sequencing relative to launch_app.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so per the rubric baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to clarify about inputs.

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?

Specific verb (List) plus a precise resource (the app names launch_app accepts), and it even characterizes the return shape as a friendly-name-to-link mapping. This distinguishes it cleanly from siblings like launch_app, get_status, or get_remotes.

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?

By tying the returned names directly to launch_app's accepted input, it gives clear context for when to call it (discovery before launching). It stops short of an explicit 'call this before launch_app' instruction or any exclusion, so it is clear context rather than full when/when-not guidance.

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