Create App Store Version

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

Annotations already indicate non-readonly, non-idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds value by detailing the return object (including typical state 'PREPARE_FOR_SUBMISSION') and error condition, going beyond what annotations provide.

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?

The description is well-structured with clearly labeled sections (Args, Returns, Error Handling). It is concise with no superfluous text, and the main purpose is front-loaded.

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?

For a straightforward creation tool with 3 parameters and schema/annotations covering basics, the description is complete: it covers purpose, parameters, return format, and error handling. No output schema exists, but the return structure is explicitly detailed.

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%, but the description enhances parameter understanding with examples (e.g., '1.3.4' for versionString) and explicit value lists for platform. This adds clarity beyond the schema's field descriptions.

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?

The description clearly states that the tool creates a new App Store version for an app, with a practical example ('to start preparing the next release'). It fully distinguishes from sibling creation tools like asc_create_version_localization by focusing solely on version creation.

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 provides a use example and error handling (duplicate version) but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or compare it to alternatives like asc_list_app_store_versions. The context is clear but lacks exclusionary guidance.

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