sysknife_list_installed_flatpaks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so 'Read-only' is pure repetition. Beyond that, the description adds nothing about scope, what 'for a user' means in practice (all users vs. current user), or any output/pagination behavior for a listing that could be long.

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 short clauses, front-loaded with the action name and effect, with no filler. Slightly hurt by the dangling 'param: username*' fragment whose asterisk notation is unexplained.

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?

No output schema and no annotations-only relief for the listing semantics; the description neither explains the return shape nor resolves which sibling lister to pick. Given a cluster of Flatpak-related siblings, this is not sufficient to call the tool confidently.

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 description asserts 'param: username*' as required, but the input schema declares zero parameters (additionalProperties: true, no properties). This is misleading rather than additive: an agent told to pass a required username will find no such field defined.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'list installed Flatpak apps for a user'. However, it does not distinguish itself from the close sibling sysknife_ubuntu_list_flatpaks or from sysknife_list_flatpak_remotes, which an agent must otherwise infer by name alone.

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 on when to use this vs. sysknife_ubuntu_list_flatpaks (also a Flatpak lister) or sysknife_get_flatpak_app_info (single-app detail). 'Read-only' implies safety but not selection criteria; the one differentiating hook (per-user scope) is buried in the param fragment.

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