List Apps

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it explicitly states 'Side effects: none (read-only)' and discloses behavior regarding DOKKU_APP_ALLOWLIST / DOKKU_APP_DENYLIST filtering. This gives an agent clear expectations beyond the bare operation.

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 extremely concise: three short sentences that state purpose, side effects, and filtering behavior. Every sentence adds value, and the read-only note is front-loaded.

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 the tool's low complexity, zero parameters, and presence of an output schema, the description covers what matters: what it lists, that it is read-only, and how app filtering works. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 and the schema already covers this completely. Per the baseline rule for 0 parameters, no additional parameter explanation is needed, so the description earns a solid baseline score.

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 a clear verb and resource: 'List Dokku apps on the host.' This distinguishes it from app-specific tools like app_report or app_logs by implying a broader listing scope, but it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings or name alternatives.

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?

No guidance is given about when to choose this tool over app_report, app_config, or other siblings. The read-only nature is stated, but there is no explicit context for when listing is appropriate versus fetching details for a single app.

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