dataverse_list_apps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, meaning the description doesn't need to cover safety. The description adds value by listing returned fields and parameter behavior, but doesn't reveal additional behavioral traits beyond annotations.

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?

Three sentences with clear structure: purpose, return fields, and parameter guidance. Front-loaded and efficient with no wasted words.

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?

With output schema present, the description doesn't need to detail return values but covers key fields and the main parameter. It mentions a sibling tool for next steps. Lacks mention of pagination or the `top` parameter.

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% according to context, so the description must compensate. It explains the `include_unpublished` parameter and lists return fields, but doesn't describe `dataverse_url` or `top` beyond the schema.

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 the tool lists model-driven apps (AppModule records) and lists the returned fields. It distinguishes from sibling `dataverse_get_app` for inspecting a single app.

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 explains when to use `include_unpublished` and references `dataverse_get_app` for deeper inspection. While it provides good context, it could be more explicit about when to choose this listing over other list tools.

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