apple_list_subscriptions

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 usefully documents the 'state' field semantics (MISSING_METADATA vs READY_TO_SUBMIT), which is genuine behavioral context beyond the schema. However, it says nothing about pagination, permissions, rate limits, or whether this reflects live App Store Connect state, leaving gaps for a read 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 tight sentences: purpose first, then a key semantic note about the 'state' field. No filler; 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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be fully explained, yet the description goes further by clarifying the critical 'state' semantics. Missing pagination/permission context, but overall complete enough for an agent to call this correctly.

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?

One parameter (app_id) with 0% schema description coverage, but a single, self-evident required identifier. The description adds meaning by explaining the returned 'state' values, compensating for the missing param docs. Baseline for a 1-param tool is generous, and the state explanation adds real value.

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 the app's subscription groups, with the products in each') and defines scope precisely. An agent can distinguish it from siblings like apple_create_subscription_group or apple_set_subscription_price without opening any 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?

The description implies usage via the app_id param and the state explanation, but never states when to call this vs alternatives (e.g., before submission) or any prerequisites. Usage is inferable but not explicit.

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