publish_app

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

Annotations mark this as a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive mutation. The description adds substantial behavioral context: immediate effect, no review queue, public vs unlisted visibility semantics, viewer role-based data access, and deliberate lack of search-engine indexing. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Long but well-structured and front-loaded with the core action. Each sentence adds a distinct fact: modes, return value, viewer access, indexing caveat, usage trigger, and reversal. The named app-store neighbors are minor extra color but not harmful.

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 exists, so the description's 'Returns public_url' is important and present. It covers prerequisites (ownership), modes, side effects, viewer data visibility, indexing caveat, and reversal. For a mutation tool with two parameters, this is 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real value by explaining the visibility enum in concrete terms (app store tile plus public URL vs URL only) and clarifying that app_id must reference an app the user owns. This lifts it above the 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 and resource: 'Publish an app YOU own.' It clearly differentiates from siblings by describing the two visibility modes and explicitly naming unpublish_app as the reversal. An agent can tell this is about making an app available, not creating, updating, or previewing it.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger: 'Use it when the user says the app is ready to share.' It also sets an ownership prerequisite and points to unpublish_app as the alternative for reversal. It does not enumerate exclusions against other app-related tools, but the context is clear enough.

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