list-priority-applications

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses read-only behavior ('List', 'Fetches live status'), and warns that UI favorites cannot be read. No mention of side effects, permissions, or rate limits, but for a read tool this is adequate.

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 sentences, no redundant words. First sentence states action and data source; second adds useful constraint about UI favorites. Every sentence contributes meaning.

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 simple schema (0 required params, no enums, no output schema) and two sibling list tools, description is complete: it covers what, source, live status, and limitation. Agent can use it 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?

Schema coverage is 100% (both parameters described). Description adds minimal extra value: environment context for profile is implied, namesOnly is self-explanatory. Baseline 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?

Description uses specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies resource as 'MCP priority/bookmark applications' specified by env var ARGOCD_PRIORITY_APPS. It distinguishes from sibling list-applications by focusing on bookmarked apps, and clarifies it cannot read UI favorites, enhancing specificity.

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?

Implies use when needing priority apps and their live status, and explicitly states UI favorites are not accessible via API. However, lacks explicit alternative names (e.g., 'for all apps, use list-applications') and doesn't say when not to use it.

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