get_apps

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions pagination behavior and filtering capabilities, which is helpful. However, it doesn't disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what 'essential fields' specifically includes, leaving gaps in behavioral understanding.

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, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's core functionality, key filters, and pagination support. Every element earns its place with no wasted words, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 list tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the basic purpose and filtering. However, without annotations or output schema, it should ideally mention more about return format (e.g., what 'essential fields' includes) and any critical constraints to be fully complete.

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 schema fully documents all 5 parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning filters (name, stream, published) and pagination, but doesn't provide additional context like wildcard syntax examples or interaction effects between parameters.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Get list of Qlik Sense applications' with specific resources (applications) and essential fields/filters (name, stream, published). It distinguishes from siblings like get_app_details by focusing on listing rather than detailed retrieval, but doesn't explicitly contrast with other list-like siblings.

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 implies usage for listing applications with filtering and pagination, suggesting when to use it for bulk retrieval vs. detailed sibling tools. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives like get_app_sheets or get_app_variables for specific needs.

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