list_applications

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the endpoint and the purpose, but does not detail pagination, ordering behavior, rate limits, or the complete return structure. The parameters hint at pagination but are not explicitly described in behavior.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and contains no redundant information.

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 list tool with simple parameters, the description is fairly complete. It explains the output (refs and latest assessment) and the REST endpoint. However, it lacks details on the response format, which could be helpful without an output schema.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds the context that the list contains 'app refs and latest assessment', which provides some context but does not add new meaning to the 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 clearly states the action 'List', the resource 'applications in your NowSecure portfolio', includes the REST endpoint, and specifies the output 'app refs and the latest assessment per app'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like download_assessment_pdf and run_graphql by focusing on listing.

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 'Use to discover app refs and the latest assessment per app', giving direct usage context. It does not mention when not to use or provide alternatives, but the sibling tools imply different use cases.

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