list_apps

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It accurately describes the main behavior (listing apps) and implies a read-only operation, but it does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination, or potential errors. For a simple list operation, this is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource, containing no fluff or redundant information. It is maximally concise while conveying the essential purpose and output.

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's simplicity (no parameters), the presence of an output schema, and the straightforward purpose, the description is complete. It states what the tool does and the key fields returned, needing no further elaboration for an agent to select and invoke 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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty, so the description need not explain parameter syntax. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description does not need to add anything beyond what it includes.

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 apps published by this server, with a specific verb ('list'), resource ('apps'), and scope ('published by this server'). It also mentions the output fields (status and URL), distinguishing it from siblings like get_app (single app) and create/update/delete mutations.

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 when you need an overview of all apps on the server, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like get_app for a single app. There are no direct exclusions or alternative tool mentions, leaving the usage context partially implicit.

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