list_applications

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'List Functions applications', omitting any details about read-only nature, permissions, pagination, or side effects. Listing operations are generally safe, but the description fails to confirm this or mention potential issues like rate limits.

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 single phrase is concise but lacks essential structure. It does not explain what 'Functions applications' are, and no additional sentences provide context. Conciseness at the expense of completeness reduces usefulness.

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?

The tool is simple (list resources), but with no output schema and no parameter explanations, the description is incomplete. An agent cannot determine if this tool meets its needs without more context about return format, filtering, or typical usage.

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 neither the schema nor the description explains the parameters (compartment_id, limit). The description adds no meaning beyond what the schema provides. An agent would not know the purpose or constraints of these parameters.

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 Functions applications' clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'Functions applications'. It is not a tautology as it specifies the domain (Functions). However, it does not differentiate from sibling list tools like list_functions or list_buckets.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling list tools, a description of the typical use case or limitations would help the agent select the correct tool.

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