list_apps

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context: it returns running apps plus those used in the last 14 days with frequency details. This goes beyond annotations without contradiction.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, no filler, front-loaded with the primary action. Every word adds value.

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 adequately describes what is returned (running apps, recent apps, usage frequency). For a simple list tool with no parameters, no further detail is needed.

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 tool has no parameters, so the description has no parameter semantics to add. With 100% schema coverage and no params, a baseline of 4 is appropriate as there is no need for additional parameter explanation.

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 tool lists apps on the computer, specifying both currently running and those used in the last 14 days, with usage frequency details. It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('apps'), and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_app_state' which targets a single app.

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?

While the purpose is clear, the description offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. It is implied that this is for browsing all apps, but no exclusion or preferential scenarios are mentioned.

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