list_bundlesList uploaded Android App Bundles (AABs) with version codes and hashes for a package, so you can inspect which builds are available in Google Play Console.
Lists the app bundles (AABs) uploaded for the app, with version codes and hashes.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| package_name | No | Android package name. Defaults to PLAY_MCP_PACKAGE. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds only that version codes and hashes come back; it says nothing about ordering, pagination, or behavior when no bundles exist.
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 tight sentence with the resource and returned data front-loaded and zero filler. Nothing can be trimmed without losing 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 read-only lister with one fully documented optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns well enough to call correctly. Only missing pieces are ordering/pagination and empty-result behavior, which are minor here.
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?
Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, including the PLAY_MCP_PACKAGE default note, so the schema does the work. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, which is the expected baseline when coverage is complete.
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?
Specific verb+resource ('Lists the app bundles (AABs)') plus a preview of returned fields (version codes and hashes), and it expands the AAB acronym so the agent knows the artifact type. It is clearly distinguishable from upload_bundle or list_tracks, though it doesn't explicitly contrast itself with a sibling.
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?
There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative reference at all. The agent must infer from the name alone that this is the read-side counterpart to upload_bundle, and nothing states preconditions or scope.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.