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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden; it does disclose that results are session/credential-scoped ('visible to the current App Store Connect session'), which is useful auth context. It says nothing about pagination, result ordering, or what happens when the session has no apps, which are meaningful gaps for a listing tool with zero annotation coverage.

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, zero waste, with the identifying purpose stated first and the routing guidance second. Every sentence 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 no-required-param list tool with no output schema, the description supplies the one fact an agent needs downstream — that this is the source of asc_app_id. Slightly incomplete in that it never indicates whether results are paginated or how many apps to expect.

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% with a single optional parameter, so the schema already documents notification_message. The description adds no further parameter meaning; baseline 3 applies when structured fields do the work.

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 apps') plus a scope qualifier ('visible to the current App Store Connect session') that separates it from the per-app sibling get_app. An agent can pick this tool without opening either 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 says when to use it ('to find an existing asc_app_id before create_app or any per-app tool'), naming both the downstream alternatives and the condition that selects this tool. Nothing is left to inference.

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