Công cụ MONA app list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description's timing content is about git app deploys rather than this list operation, so it adds little real behavioral context; return format and pagination are unaddressed.

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 text is bilingual with slash-separated duplication, and it embeds deployment-timing information that is irrelevant to a list tool. It is not front-loaded on the actual purpose and wastes space on off-topic content.

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, fully schema-covered, read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers the minimum. But the inclusion of unrelated deploy timing leaves the definition feeling partially borrowed rather than purpose-built, and it omits any indication of what the list returns.

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% for the single 'sandbox' boolean, so the schema already carries the parameter meaning. The description adds no syntax or semantic detail beyond the schema, which matches the baseline of 3.

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 does state the core verb+resource ('Liệt kê app' / 'List apps') and identifies itself as a compatibility alias of cloud_app_list, which helps place it among siblings. However the deploy-timing content ('app host đầu tiên ~2–3 phút, deploy sau đó 10–20 giây') is unrelated noise that muddles the purpose statement.

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?

It offers one concrete usage cue: 'List apps before creating to avoid duplicates.' That is a real when-to-use hint, but it names no alternative (other than implying the cloud_app_list alias) and gives no when-not-to-use guidance.

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