list_apps

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool lists apps and their launch ids, which suggests a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm safety, authentication needs, or potential side effects. For a simple list tool, this is adequate but lacks explicit assurance.

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 sentence with no extraneous words. It is very concise. However, it could be slightly more structured by separating the purpose and output, but it remains highly efficient.

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 that the tool has no parameters, no output schema, and is simple, the description captures the essential information: what it lists and what is returned. It does not mention any limitations or additional details, but it is sufficient for a straightforward list operation.

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 no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). The description adds value by specifying that the output includes 'launch ids,' which goes beyond the schema's empty definition. Baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'installed apps' and specifies that it returns 'launch ids.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'launch_app' or 'close_app' which involve actions on apps.

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 retrieving installed apps but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, such as when to use 'list_channels' or 'list_inputs.' No exclusions or hints about prerequisites are given.

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