List Scoped Applications

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, establishing the read-only safety profile. The description adds context about sys_app records and optional filtering, but does not disclose return format, pagination, or auth details beyond the schema's instance parameter. Minimal behavioral disclosure 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?

The description is a single sentence that front-loads the action ('List') and resource, with no redundant or extraneous content. Every word earns its place.

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 operation with a comprehensive schema, the description is mostly complete. The main gap is lack of sibling differentiation and return format details, but given the low complexity and presence of annotations, it is adequately contextual.

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 coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for limit, query, and instance. The description's mention of 'optional filtering' adds no new semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 resource 'scoped applications (sys_app records)', clearly indicating the tool lists scoped app records on the instance. It distinguishes from siblings like list_company_apps by explicitly targeting 'scoped' applications.

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 such as list_company_apps or get_app_details. The description only states what it does, without context for selection or exclusions.

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