list_apps

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It implicitly indicates a read-only listing behavior and adds the useful dependency context that returned appIds are prerequisites for other tools. While it does not mention pagination or rate limits, these are not critical for a simple list operation, and the description adequately conveys what the tool returns and its role.

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 sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence states the core functionality and the fields returned, front-loading the most critical information. The second sentence adds a precise usage directive. Every phrase 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 zero-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description fully equips an agent: it names the resource, enumerates the returned fields, and explains why and when to call it. There is nothing additional an agent needs to invoke it correctly.

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 zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there is nothing for the description to add. Per the baseline rule for 0-param tools, a score of 4 is appropriate since the description contributes no redundant information and does not need to compensate for schema gaps.

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 ('List'), a clear resource ('apps tracked in this Storelift account'), and enumerates the fields returned (id, name, countries, keywords). This distinguishes it from the sibling get_* tools, which all retrieve specific attribute data for a single app rather than listing all apps.

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?

Explicitly states the intended invocation order ('Call this first') and the reason ('every other tool needs an appId from here'). This leaves no ambiguity about when to use this tool versus the siblings and establishes a dependency relationship.

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