list_scoped_apps

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds context by clarifying that these are custom apps installed in the instance, but it does not disclose return format, pagination behavior, or filtering defaults beyond the schema. This is acceptable but not rich.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the action verb and resource, with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple list tool.

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 the simple list operation, full parameter coverage, and readOnly annotations, the description is adequate. However, there is no output schema and the description does not clarify what fields are returned or whether inactive apps are included by default, leaving some ambiguity.

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% for all three parameters (limit, query, active), so the schema already documents each parameter. The description does not add additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 'List scoped applications (custom apps) installed in the instance' uses a specific verb (List), identifies the resource (scoped applications / custom apps), and clarifies scope (installed in the instance). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_scoped_app, create_scoped_app, and update_scoped_app.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives are provided. The tool name and description imply its use for listing scoped apps, but it does not mention when to prefer this over get_scoped_app or other list tools.

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