freee application list

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering safety. The description adds useful behavior beyond annotations: it defaults to pending applications and scopes to visible applications in the current account's workflow. This adds context without contradicting annotations.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and scope, followed by a useful default behavior note. No wasted words.

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 list tool with strong annotations and a single self-descriptive parameter, the description covers the core purpose and default. It does not mention return format or pagination, but given the absence of an output schema and low complexity, this is not a major gap.

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?

There is only one parameter, status, with an enum and default in the schema, but the description does not explain how the status parameter controls the returned list. The phrase 'Defaults to pending applications' merely repeats the schema's default and does not clarify the meaning of values like 'returned' or 'all'. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate.

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 clearly states the tool reads applications in the current account's approval workflow, with a plural noun indicating a list operation. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like freee_approval_detail (detail) and freee_approval_commit_action (action) by focusing on reading multiple applications.

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 a clear context (listing approval workflow applications) but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as freee_approval_detail for a single application. Usage is implied but not stated with exclusions or alternatives.

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