list_developers_and_apps

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains pagination behavior (paged preview, total counts, offset/limit) and includes a critical instruction about user confirmation. It fully discloses behavioral traits.

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 somewhat lengthy but well-structured with a bold critical instruction. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with key actions. Could be slightly trimmed but efficient overall.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return format (paged preview, total counts) and how to paginate. It covers all necessary context for a list tool, including user interaction guidance.

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 100%, baseline 3. The description adds meaning by explaining that limit controls the preview size and offset skips entries, with context about paged responses, beyond the schema's brief descriptions.

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 it lists developers and apps/games for the current user, distinguishing it from sibling tools by explicitly mentioning to use prepare_h5_upload for H5 game upload. It provides specific verb and resource context.

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 explicitly states when to use (initial exploration, switching apps, general app management) and when not to use (H5 upload, directing to prepare_h5_upload). It also gives a critical instruction to show preview to user and ask for confirmation, aiding correct invocation.

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