list_applications

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Get information' implies a read-only operation, and 'all applications on the server' scopes the behavior. It also discloses that the tool's key output is application IDs needed for downstream functions.

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 sentences with no filler. The main function is stated first, then the critical call-ordering instruction follows immediately. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given it is a parameterless list tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what it returns (application information/IDs) and why it matters. It could have added explicit notes about response shape or authentication, but those are minor for such a simple discovery operation.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly does not attempt to document parameters; it mentions the relevant semantic output (application IDs) instead.

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 action ('Get information'), a clear resource ('all applications on the server'), and a scoping purpose (obtain application IDs). It positions itself as the entry point for deployment functions, so an agent can distinguish it from sibling tools like list_components or list_application_processes.

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?

Provides an explicit directive: ALWAYS call this first before any other deployment functions. This clearly states when it should be used, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases because there are no real alternatives for obtaining application IDs.

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