List System Apk Variants

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation, and 'previously created' adds a meaningful constraint that only existing variants are returned. However, it does not disclose potential pagination, ordering, or what happens when no variants exist. This is acceptable but minimal for a simple list operation.

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, focused sentence with no redundancy. It front-loads the action and resource, then scopes it by app bundle version. Every word 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?

For a simple two-parameter list operation with an output schema present, the description is reasonably complete. However, it does not explain how this relates to sibling tools such as list_generated_apks or get_system_apk_variant, and it lacks any usage context about when an agent should select this tool over those alternatives. The output schema covers return values, but the missing guidance leaves a notable gap.

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%, so the input schema already fully documents package_name and version_code. The description's phrase 'for an app bundle version' reinforces the role of version_code but adds no format or value detail beyond the schema. A baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb and resource: it lists system APK variants for a given app bundle version. The qualifier 'previously created' distinguishes it from create operations, and the plural 'variants' distinguishes it from the singular get_system_apk_variant. It does not explicitly differentiate from related listing tools like list_generated_apks, so it falls just short of a 5.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_system_apk_variant, list_generated_apks, or download_system_apk_variant. The phrase 'previously created' weakly implies post-creation use, but no exclusions, preconditions, or alternative-routing information is provided.

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