app_list

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It implies a read-only enumeration but never states that it is non-mutating, whether system/preinstalled packages are included, whether results are ordered, or whether package-visibility permissions are required - all material for an agent on a device.

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 no filler; the resource comes first and the optional filter second. It is terse to the point of leaving gaps, but nothing in it is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, and the tool is simple with one optional parameter. Still, an agent cannot tell from this text whether the listing includes system apps or how results are ordered, which are the remaining things it would need before relying on the output.

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 coverage is 0%, with the single 'contains' parameter left undocumented in the schema, but the description compensates by explaining that it is a substring filter. It does not say what the substring is matched against (package name vs. label) or whether matching is case-sensitive, so the meaning is only partially added.

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 names a specific resource ('Installed packages') and the operation (listing, carried by the tool name app_list), which is enough to separate it from app_launch, app_stop and app_current. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with those siblings, so it is clear but not maximally differentiated.

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 only guidance is 'optionally filtered by substring', which describes a parameter rather than when to choose this tool over app_current or app_launch. There is no statement of preconditions, no when-not-to-use case, and no named alternative.

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