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

The description discloses return fields, ordering, and the unusual behavior that releases with installable:false cannot be installed and include the reason. With no annotations, this carries the burden well, though it doesn't explicitly confirm read-only behavior or error cases.

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 three succinct sentences: it states the purpose, lists return values, and flags an important caveat. No filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description enumerates all returned fields, covers the ordering, and addresses the installable:false edge case. It also points to firebase_list_apps for the required IDs. Nothing needed to call the tool correctly is missing.

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% – each parameter is documented. The description adds a useful hint to obtain appId and projectNumber via firebase_list_apps, which goes slightly beyond the schema's value descriptions. Limit is already self-explanatory in the schema.

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 uses a specific verb 'List', names the resource 'recent builds distributed for one Firebase app', states ordering 'newest first', and enumerates return fields. It is clearly distinct from the sibling firebase_install_release (which installs) and firebase_list_apps (which lists 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?

The description gives clear context: it is for listing builds and identifies a prerequisite sibling firebase_list_apps for obtaining appId/projectNumber. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over firebase_install_release or when not to use it, so it stops short of a full exclusion.

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