atv_list_apps

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It describes a read-only list operation but does not explicitly state that it is side-effect free, does not mention authentication requirements, or indicate what happens if no device is specified. While not misleading, it lacks explicit behavioral context.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose and output format. There is no extraneous information or repetition of schema details, making it appropriately concise.

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?

While an output schema exists and the description mentions the output fields, the complete lack of explanation for the 'device' parameter makes the tool difficult to use correctly. The agent cannot determine how to select a specific device or whether the parameter is required for certain scenarios. The description is too sparse for a tool with an undocumented 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?

The schema has one parameter 'device' with no description and 0% coverage. The description does not mention the device parameter at all, leaving its purpose, format, and default behavior completely undocumented. The description fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 states a clear verb ('List') and resource ('apps installed on the Apple TV'), and specifies the output content (name + bundle identifier). It is easily distinguishable from sibling tools like atv_launch_app or atv_remote, which perform different actions.

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 purpose implies when to use it (to see installed apps), but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives or any mention of prerequisite conditions. No exclusions or alternative tool names are given, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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