List GitHub Apps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds little beyond the purpose; it doesn't disclose pagination behavior or the fact that limit/offset control results. With annotations present, the lack of extra behavioral detail is acceptable but not exceptional.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the main action. Every word adds value, with no redundant information.

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 list operation with readOnlyHint and no output schema, the description adequately conveys the main return value ('GitHub Apps'). It doesn't explain pagination effects or the exact scope, but the overall context is sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain the 'limit' and 'offset' parameters. While these are common pagination parameters, the description does nothing to clarify their role, leaving the agent to infer semantics. This is a clear gap.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('all configured GitHub Apps'), which is specific and distinguishes it from siblings that operate on branches or repositories. The additional purpose note ('Used for private repository access') adds useful context.

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 gives a clear context for use ('Used for private repository access'), implying when this tool is relevant. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, such as using getGithubAppBranches or getGithubAppRepositories for related but different needs.

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