ios_list_apps

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

Annotations already communicate that the operation is read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds that it enumerates installed apps and exposes bundle identifiers, but it does not disclose potential caveats such as the default 'user' filter or permission requirements. This is acceptable but not rich.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource, contains no filler, and immediately tells the agent what the tool does and what information it provides.

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?

Tool complexity is low: one optional, fully documented parameter; annotations describe safety; and an output schema exists. The description is complete enough for a straightforward read-only enumeration. The main missing piece is usage guidance, already penalized under that dimension.

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?

The only parameter, 'kind', has 100% schema coverage with a clear description of 'user', 'system', or 'all'. The tool description itself adds no extra parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('apps installed on the device') and explicitly mentions the bundle identifiers returned. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ios_list_devices, ios_launch_app, and ios_install_app without requiring schema inspection.

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 does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. An agent is not told, for example, that this is useful for discovering bundle identifiers before launching an app, and no alternative tools are referenced.

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