list-apps

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List apps' reveals nothing about the operation's behavior - no indication of whether it's paginated, what permissions are required, whether it's read-only or has side effects, what format the output takes, or any rate limits. This is completely inadequate for a tool with parameters and no annotation coverage.

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?

While technically concise with just two words, this represents under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The description doesn't contain enough information to be useful, so its brevity is a liability. There's no structure or front-loading of critical information - it's just the bare minimum.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (1 parameter with nested properties), complete lack of annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description 'List apps' is completely inadequate. It fails to provide any of the necessary context for an agent to understand what this tool does, when to use it, how it behaves, or what its parameters mean.

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%, meaning none of the parameters have descriptions in the schema. The tool description 'List apps' provides zero information about the query parameter or its nested properties (limit, name, offset). The description fails completely to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation, leaving all parameters semantically undefined.

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 'List apps' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name without adding any meaningful clarification. It doesn't specify what type of apps, from what system, or what scope. While it does include the verb 'list', it fails to distinguish this tool from its many sibling list tools (list-deployments, list-instances, list-services, list-one-click-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 provides absolutely no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple sibling list tools available (list-deployments, list-instances, list-services, list-one-click-apps), there's no indication of what distinguishes 'list-apps' from these other listing operations. No context, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned.

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