list_apps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds one genuinely useful behavior — pagination via links.next — but says nothing about default/maximum page size, ordering, or what happens when the cursor is stale.

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, both front-loaded and both earning their place: one declares scope, one declares pagination. There is no filler or redundancy.

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?

With no output schema and no parameter descriptions, the definition should at minimum explain how to use the pagination cursor and what a page returns. For a 3-parameter list tool with a required continuation mechanism, the description leaves too much for the agent to guess.

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 0% across all three parameters, so the description must carry the burden and largely does not. It never explains that `next` is an opaque cursor taken from a prior response's links.next, and it is silent on the `limit` bounds (1-200) and the `bundleId` filter, leaving two of three parameters with no meaning anywhere.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("List apps") plus a scope qualifier ("accessible to the API key"), which cleanly separates it from the singular get_app sibling. It does not name any sibling explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

"Accessible to the API key" implies the discovery use case and the pagination instruction hints at iterative calls, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus get_app, and no mention of when to filter with bundleId rather than paging through everything.

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