appcrane_top_apps

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

The description discloses data source (app_visits, Caddy forward_auth), ordering (by user count descending), and access restriction (Admin only). This exceeds what structured fields provide, though it lacks details on edge cases like empty results.

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?

Four sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: purpose, use cases, data source, ordering and access. No wasted words, front-loaded with key 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?

Given no output schema, the description covers return ordering and data source. It is adequate for a simple list tool but could mention error handling (e.g., non-admin access).

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 both parameters have clear descriptions. The description reinforces 'lookback window' and 'how many rows' but adds no new information beyond the schema, resulting in 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Top apps by distinct active users in a lookback window' and provides concrete example questions that differentiate it from siblings like appcrane_top_users.

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 includes example use cases ('which apps are getting the most use this week') but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or name alternatives. However, the context is adequate for typical usage.

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