listApps

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden, but it only states 'List all apps.' It does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, ordering, access scope, or response format. This is a minimal statement with no additional context, similar to the update_drive example.

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, front-loaded sentence of four words. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundancy or unnecessary detail. It is perfectly concise for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The tool is simple (no params, output schema exists), so the description is mostly complete. It does not explain return values (handled by output schema) and covers the primary purpose. Minor gaps like pagination or authorization scope are not mentioned, but given the low complexity, it's adequate.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter info (as there are none), and the literal 'all' scope is the only semantic contribution. This is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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 all apps.' uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('apps'), with 'all' indicating scope. It is distinct from sibling tools like getApp (which retrieves a single app) and listAccounts (which lists a different resource type).

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 clearly implies the tool is used to list all apps, providing clear context for when to invoke it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., 'use getApp for a single app'), so it misses the top tier of guidance.

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