publish_managed_release

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

The description discloses the key behavioral trait that the tool is a no-op when Managed Publishing is off. This is important for the agent. It does not mention authentication or rate limits, but for a simple single-parameter tool with no annotations, this is adequate.

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 concise with 4 sentences, front-loading the purpose in the first line. Every sentence adds value: purpose, usage order, no-op condition, and parameter example. No unnecessary 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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, behavioral nuance, and parameter. It could mention the return value (e.g., success confirmation), but given the simplicity, it's nearly complete.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must add meaning. It provides an example for package_name ('e.g. com.example.myapp'), which clarifies the expected format but does not provide additional semantic detail beyond the schema's title.

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 clearly states that the tool 'Send[s] approved changes live when Managed Publishing is enabled.' It uses a specific verb ('send approved changes live') and refers to the resource ('Managed Publishing'), distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle earlier stages like create_release or promote_release.

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 explicitly explains when to use: after changes are committed via create_release/update_release/promote_release and reviewed in Play Console. It also states when not to use (if Managed Publishing is off, it's a no-op), providing clear guidance on alternatives.

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