list_apps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it says nothing about which device is queried, whether results are affected by serial/include_system, or how the listing is scoped.

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?

A single short sentence with the key qualifier front-loaded. It is efficient, though the terseness borders on under-specification for a three-parameter tool.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but the description leaves the device-selection parameter and the system-app toggle undocumented. For a tool with three optional params and zero schema coverage, this is not complete enough.

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 0% across three parameters, so the description must compensate and does not. Only 'filter' is mentioned (vaguely, as a containment match), while 'serial' and 'include_system' are entirely unexplained in both schema and description.

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 names the resource ('Installed packages') and the tool name supplies the verb 'list', so an agent can tell it apart from siblings like launch_app and install_apk. It is clear but slightly elliptical, reading as a noun phrase rather than a full statement of purpose.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor any mention of alternatives such as current_app or devices for related questions. The optional-filter behavior is the only usage hint.

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