List apps

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; 'List' implies a read-only operation and the default filtering behavior is usefully disclosed. However, it does not confirm non-destructiveness, describe result size/pagination, or indicate whether a package list can be large or truncated.

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, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the most important default behavior. Nothing is wasted.

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 list tool this is adequate, but with no output schema and no annotations the description could state the return shape (names, versions, identifiers) and confirm read-only behavior. It leaves those gaps 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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter (includeSystem) is fully documented in the schema. The description's 'third-party only by default' reinforces its meaning but adds no syntax or edge-case detail beyond what the schema already says, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List installed packages') that is clearly distinct from the sibling tools (device_info, screenshot, ui_dump, current_app). Minor friction: the tool is named list_apps but the description says 'packages', requiring the agent to infer these are the same thing.

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 default scope ('third-party only by default') implies when the default suffices and when the includeSystem flag is needed, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like current_app or device_info, nor any stated prerequisites.

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