List registered Entra applications

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool runs a specific pac command and uses the active auth profile, which implies a read-only listing behavior. However, it doesn't disclose output format, pagination, or whether it requires admin elevation beyond the profile mention.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose and the underlying command. The second sentence adds the execution mechanism. No wasted words.

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 command with 100% schema coverage, the description is mostly adequate. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it could usefully mention what the output contains (e.g., application IDs, names) and whether any prerequisites like being signed in are required.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds context that the profile is the admin account for tenant commands and that cwd is for project commands, but this is largely restating schema info. 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?

The description clearly states the tool lists Entra applications registered with the tenant for Power Platform, and identifies the underlying command ('pac admin application list'). It is distinguishable from siblings like cs_admin_list_service_principals and cs_admin_register_application, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 implies usage context: it's a read-only admin listing command for tenant-registered Entra applications. It mentions it runs with the active pac auth profile, but doesn't explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like cs_admin_list_service_principals or cs_admin_list_app_templates, nor does it state exclusions.

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