list_applications

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

The annotation provides readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds 'Read-only, consumes no quota,' which goes beyond the structured annotation. It also details the fields in the returned metadata, which is useful for an agent without an output schema. It stops short of mentioning pagination or filter behavior, but overall it adds meaningful context.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: opening purpose, a compact list of returned fields, workflow positioning, parameter clarification relative to siblings, and the read/no-quota note. It's detailed but appropriately sized for a foundational 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 it has no output schema, the description hands over the full return field list. It also identifies related sibling tools and explains exactly why calling this tool first matters, making it complete for the intended role.

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 100% because the only param app_id has a clear description in the schema. The tool description does not add extra parameter context beyond the schema, but that is not required when the schema already explains the filter.

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 begins with 'List all tracked mobile applications,' a specific verb plus resource and scope. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explaining that it returns numeric internal IDs for app-scoped tools, whereas add_application takes a store bundle ID.

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?

Explicitly states it is 'the first call of a workflow' and tells agents which sibling tools expect the internal ID vs which expect a bundle ID. This provides clear when-to-use and alternative-when-not guidance.

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