apple_upload_subscription_screenshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it flags the call as an 'External action' and describes the three-step reserve/send/commit mechanism, which tells the agent this is a multi-stage mutation against App Store Connect. It omits permissions/auth requirements, file-size or format limits, and retry/idempotency behavior.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then requirement rationale, then mechanics. Sentences are dense but each adds meaning; the three-step upload sentence is arguably more than needed for an agent that just supplies two params, keeping it from a 5.

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 need no explanation, and the description covers purpose, precondition, and mutation mechanics. The remaining gap is parameter-level detail (especially image format/path expectations), which is the one thing an agent cannot infer.

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 0% and the schema offers no descriptions, so the description must compensate — but it never mentions subscription_id or image_path. The only hint about image_path is the implied 'screenshot' requirement, with no format, size, or path-type detail. Two required, fully undocumented parameters hold this down.

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+resource ('Upload a subscription's App Review screenshot'), and the scope is narrow enough to separate it from the plural apple_upload_screenshots sibling. It does not explicitly name that sibling, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Explains the triggering condition clearly: without this screenshot the subscription stays in MISSING_METADATA and cannot be submitted. It also gives a concrete selection hint (use the screen where the subscription is offered, not the home screen). No exclusions or alternative-tool routing, so not a 5.

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