apps

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly indicates a read-only listing operation and mentions 'paired control' as a contextual prerequisite, but it does not explain failure modes, whether a device must be actively connected, or any additional side effects or requirements.

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 a single concise sentence with no filler or redundant wording. It front-loads the core purpose and includes a relevant contextual qualifier without going overboard.

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 read-only list tool, the description covers the core action and result focus, especially with an output schema present. However, the lack of parameter explanation and usage guidance leaves some gaps, though these are less critical for such a simple operation.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention the required 'device' parameter at all. The schema only provides the property name 'device' and title 'Device', which gives a minimal hint but no format, validation, or relationship to 'paired control' is explained.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('installed apps and their bundle IDs'), making the tool's function immediately clear. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like devices, observe, act, status, and control, none of which are about listing installed apps.

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 no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. It implies use when you need a list of installed apps, but does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or how it relates to sibling tools.

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