Retrieve a list of applications from a standalone VBCS instance using its REST API, ideal for apps without a VB Studio git repository.
List applications on a standalone VBCS instance via its REST API (VBCS_BASE_URL). For VBCS apps not backed by a VB Studio git repo.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| filter | No | Optional query filter, passed through as-is |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds useful context that this hits a standalone instance's REST API at VBCS_BASE_URL (implying environment/config prerequisites), but says nothing about pagination, result volume, or auth.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, with no filler. The parenthetical (VBCS_BASE_URL) and 'via its REST API' are minor implementation detail but plausibly useful for setup.
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?
No output schema exists, so the description should hint at the return shape, and it does not. For a simple read-only list tool with full annotation coverage this is adequate but leaves the returned application fields/pagination unknown.
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% for the single 'filter' parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description contributes no additional meaning about filter syntax, supported operators, or pass-through behavior beyond what the schema already states.
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?
States a specific verb and resource (list applications), the access path (standalone VBCS REST API via VBCS_BASE_URL), and a scoping qualifier ('not backed by a VB Studio git repo'). It is distinguishable from the sibling 'list_apps', though it never names that sibling outright.
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 final clause gives a clear condition for choosing this tool over the git-backed alternative, which is real routing guidance. It stops short of explicitly naming the alternative tool to use instead, so the agent must infer the pairing from the sibling list.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.