Lists installed applications on an iOS simulator from a device ID, helping you identify available apps before automating launches, taps, or other actions.
List installed applications on the simulator.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| device_id | Yes | Simulator UDID |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention that the simulator must be booted, whether system apps are included, or any side-effect-free read-only guarantee, leaving key operational context unstated.
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 with no filler. Every word contributes to specifying the action and target.
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 one-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description covers the core operation and does not need to explain return values. However, given the absence of annotations, it is incomplete regarding prerequisites and scope, which an agent would need to invoke it reliably.
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 single device_id parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning or format details beyond that, matching the baseline of 3 when schema carries parameter semantics.
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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('installed applications on the simulator'), making it immediately distinguishable from siblings like list_devices. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus related siblings such as list_devices, launch_app, or terminate_app. The description only states what it does, not when it is appropriate or what prerequisites exist.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.