apps

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It usefully discloses the 90-second timeout and frames the operation as read-only. However, it leaves the default appsFilter behavior and device-selection prerequisites implicit, so it only partially covers the behavioral 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?

Two short sentences with no filler: the purpose comes first, followed by the filter guidance and timeout constraint. Every sentence earns its place.

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 read-only listing tool with a full output schema and fully documented parameters, the description covers the core task, the filtering policy, and the timeout. Some cross-tool guidance is left implicit, but nothing essential for a correct call is missing.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds actionable meaning beyond the schema by telling the agent when to include system/OEM apps, which maps directly to the appsFilter parameter choice. This extra guidance justifies the above-baseline score.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('apps installed on the selected device') and scope, making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like install, reinstall, or appstate. The phrase 'apps installed' clearly identifies this as an enumeration tool.

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 provides clear context—list installed apps for the selected device—and an explicit filtering rule: include system or OEM apps only when needed as automation targets. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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