pt_list_apps

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. The verb 'List' strongly implies a read-only operation, and it discloses the output fields (bundle IDs and display names). It does not undermine any safety expectations or hide side effects.

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 a single, focused sentence that conveys the tool's purpose and output without any redundant or extraneous content. Every word 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?

For a simple read-only list operation with one optional parameter, the description is nearly complete: it states the action, the target (simulator apps), and the returned data (bundle IDs and display names). It could note whether a booted simulator is required, but this is reasonably implied.

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, 'udid', is fully described in the schema ('Simulator UDID (uses active device if not specified)'), achieving 100% schema coverage. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('List') and clearly identifies the resource ('all installed apps on the simulator') and the output ('bundle IDs and display names'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pt_list_simulators and pt_list_elements.

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 clearly states its purpose, so usage context is evident: use this when you need to see installed apps and their identifiers. It does not explicitly discuss alternatives or exclusions, but no strong need exists given the clear scope.

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