do_list_apps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds nothing further: no pagination behavior, no auth/token scope context, no note about default result count beyond what the schema states.

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?

A single clean sentence with no filler and the verb front-loaded. It is efficiently sized, though its brevity is partly the cause of the missing guidance rather than a strength in itself.

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 trivial two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and read-only annotations, the description is just barely sufficient. It omits pagination behavior and the return shape, which matter modestly for a list endpoint, but nothing critical is missing.

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% – the limit parameter is documented with its max (200) and default (25), and access_token is described as a DigitalOcean personal access token. The description adds no meaning beyond that, so baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource: 'List DigitalOcean App Platform apps.' The domain qualifier separates it from generic list tools, but it never distinguishes itself from close siblings like fly_list_apps, do_list_droplets, or do_list_databases.

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 gives no conditions for use, no exclusions, and no routing to alternatives. An agent must infer on its own when App Platform app listing is the right call versus other DigitalOcean or app-listing siblings.

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