list_apps

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

Since there are no annotations, the description must disclose behavior and does so by listing return fields and the optional grouped view. However, it omits potential behavioral traits such as pagination, sorting, or rate limits, which are relevant for a listing tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and includes the optional grouping in a concise manner. There is no redundant or unnecessary wording.

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, the description covers the operation, return fields, and parameters sufficiently. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by listing the returned data. However, it lacks guidance on alternative tools and edge-case behaviors, which prevents a perfect score.

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 only parameter 'grouped' is fully documented in the input schema (100% coverage). The description's phrase 'Optionally returns a grouped view' mirrors the schema without adding new semantic meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 it lists every app in the PrivacyTracker library with specific fields (developer, bundle id, change counts, timestamps). The verb 'List' and scope 'every app' distinguish it from siblings like get_app (single app) and search_apps (filtered search).

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that search_apps might be used for filtering or that this tool is the comprehensive listing, leaving the selection criteria to the agent's inference.

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