open_recent_appsShow the recent-apps overview on a connected device to switch between running apps. Use when you need to bring up recent tasks for navigation.
Open the recent-apps overview.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| device | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action without disclosing side effects, prerequisites (e.g., device must be awake), or what happens if no recent apps exist. The optional 'device' parameter hints at multi-device support but the description doesn't explain behavior across devices.
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 short sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices useful context, but for what it contains, it is concise.
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 the tool has an output schema and one optional parameter, the description is minimal. It lacks context about device targeting, prerequisites, and expected outcomes. The output schema may cover return values, but the description doesn't help an agent understand when or how to invoke this 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?
Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the 'device' parameter at all. The schema shows it's an optional string/null with a default of null, but the description adds no meaning about what device values are valid or how the parameter affects behavior.
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 states a specific verb ('Open') and resource ('recent-apps overview'), which clearly identifies the tool's function. It distinguishes it from sibling tools like launch_app or open_deeplink, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like launch_app, press_home, or system_intent. The context is implied by the name and description, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use information.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.