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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose that the tool is read-only, which is valuable. However, it doesn't cover auth requirements, rate limits, or what the response looks like beyond implying display sizes, leaving meaningful behavioral gaps.

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 tight sentences, with the read-only nature and resource scope front-loaded before the usage hint. No wasted text.

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 no-annotation, no-output-schema read tool, the description implies the useful return content (which display sizes have assets) and the read-only safety profile. Minor gaps remain around response structure and the purpose of the notification_message parameter, but the core is covered.

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 optional parameter (notification_message), so the schema already documents it fully. The description adds nothing about parameters, which is acceptable at high coverage but not above baseline.

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) and resource (screenshot and app preview sets for an app store version localization), enough that an agent can distinguish it from siblings like upload_screenshot or get_app_store_version without consulting a schema.

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 instructs 'Use before upload_screenshot to see which display sizes already have assets,' naming the sibling and the triggering condition. It stops short of stating when-not-to-use or naming other alternatives, but the usage context is clear.

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