Getting apps report errors

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds the permission requirement 'view_installed_software,' which is useful beyond annotations. No contradictions. Behavior is adequately disclosed.

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 short but contains redundancy ('Getting apps report errors. Returns apps report errors.'). It could be more concise without repetition. Structure is acceptable but not exemplary.

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?

With an output schema present (not shown but indicated), return values are documented. The description is minimal but sufficient given high schema coverage and annotations. However, for a tool with 9 parameters, slightly more context about what errors entail could improve completeness.

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?

Input schema covers all 9 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds 'Use parameters to filter out returned results' but provides no additional semantic detail beyond the schema. 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 states it returns 'apps report errors' and mentions filtering, but it's repetitive and doesn't strongly differentiate from siblings like list_installed_software_data or list_report_errors. The verb 'list' from the name is clear, but the description could be more specific about what constitutes an error.

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 only says to use parameters to filter results. It provides no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, such as when needing error reports vs. general data. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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