list_system_apk_variants

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It implies a read-only operation via 'List' and 'previously created', but it does not mention pagination, ordering, authentication, or other result-handling details. Adequate for a straightforward list tool but minimal.

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?

One concise sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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 two-parameter list tool with an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains the core function, though it could benefit from naming sibling tools for differentiation, but this is not critical given the low complexity.

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 input schema fully describes both parameters with clear descriptions (package_name, version_code), so the schema carries the semantic load. The description adds no extra parameter context beyond restating the version code association.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('previously created system APK variants') with a clear scope ('for an app bundle version'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_system_apk_variant (single fetch) and create_system_apk_variant (creation).

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 phrase 'previously created' implies this is for viewing existing variants, not creating or downloading. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, leaving the distinction to the user's inference.

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