huddo_app_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered; the description usefully adds that apps are owner-published shared mini-apps each holding one shared JSON state. It does not mention pagination, filtering, or whether all apps or a subset are returned, so it adds modest context beyond the annotation.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and resource, then the return fields. The final sentence about shared JSON state earns its place by clarifying what an app is, though the parenthetical example is slightly parenthetical-heavy.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the return fields (id, name, description) and explaining the shared-state nature of the resource. The main gap is the lack of routing versus the other app_* siblings.

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 coverage is 100%, with 'as' and 'room' fully documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no further parameter semantics (defaults, formats, or interaction between as/room).

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 verb (List) and resource (room's apps) and describes the returned fields (id, name, one-line description), so an agent knows exactly what it yields. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like huddo_app_state or huddo_app_submit, so routing relies on inference from the word 'List'.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is for discovering which apps exist, but the description never states when to use it versus huddo_app_state (read one app's state) or huddo_app_submit. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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