play_upload_screenshots

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the critical behavior: it is an 'External action' and the commit 'publishes to the listing immediately — it does not depend on a release or on review'. That is meaningful, non-obvious context. It omits what happens to existing screenshots (the replace parameter's effect) and any permission requirements.

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 purpose, then immediacy, then ordering, then image_type semantics — a logical progression with little waste. Slightly verbose in the middle paragraph but each sentence carries information.

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 described, and the key behavioral trait (immediate publish, no review) is covered. The gap is the undocumented replace/language parameters for a mutation tool with no annotations.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does document image_type's five accepted values and the folder naming/ordering convention, but leaves replace, language, and package_name entirely unexplained in both schema and description.

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 precise verb+resource ('Upload the Play Store listing screenshots') and scopes it further by clarifying that each image_type size is a separate call. An agent can distinguish this from the read counterpart play_list_screenshots without opening either 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?

Gives real usage guidance: 'call once per folder' and 'each size is a separate set', plus the ordering convention. It stops short of naming the alternative tools (e.g. play_list_screenshots to verify) or stating prerequisites like auth/account context.

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