nexus_get_api_applications

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint false). The description adds that it returns a JSON list with specific fields and identifies it as v2 GraphQL, but does not mention autthentication requirements or rate limits. This is acceptable given annotation coverage, so average score.

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, the second lists the return fields. The purpose is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool with output schema present. The description provides enough detail about scope and return structure for an agent to invoke it correctly without further investigation.

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 has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%. With no params to document, a baseline of 4 is appropriate since no param semantics are needed.

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 authenticated account's registered API applications' and notes v2 GraphQL. This clearly differentiates it from other nexus_* tools because the resource is unambiguous as API applications.

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?

No alternatives are explicitly named, but the account-scoped scope clearly implies this is the tool for viewing the authenticated user's own API applications. Since no sibling tool serves the same function, missing exclusion guidance is not a practical gap.

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