apps_get

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Fetch', implying read-only, but omits details about authentication, rate limits, or any side effects. The list of fields includes 'etc.', indicating incompleteness.

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?

One sentence, directly states purpose and examples. Efficient, though the trailing 'etc.' adds vagueness. Could be slightly more structured but overall concise.

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?

No output schema, so the description should fully describe return values. It lists several fields but includes 'etc.', leaving incompleteness. For a simple fetch tool, it's marginally adequate, but lacks error handling or edge case context.

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 description does not mention the parameters (adamId and orgId) at all. With only 50% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but fails to clarify what these parameters are or how to use them.

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?

Clearly states the action 'Fetch' and the resource 'App Store metadata for an app'. Lists example fields to specify what metadata is returned. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like apps_assets_find or apps_locale_details, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are many sibling tools with similar purposes (e.g., apps_assets_find, apps_locale_details), but the description provides no context for selection.

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