Get App Price Schedule

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive. The description adds value by specifying that it retrieves both current and scheduled manual prices, and includes price point IDs. It does not contradict annotations. However, it could further disclose pagination or authorization 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?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that is concise and front-loaded. It contains no extraneous 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema, read-only), the description is reasonably complete. It specifies what data is returned (current and scheduled prices, price point IDs). However, it does not mention the return format (likely a list or object) or any related resources like territories.

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?

The input schema has one required parameter (appId) with 0% description coverage. The description mentions 'app' implicitly but does not explicitly describe the appId parameter or its format. For a simple parameter, this is a minor gap, but the description should compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 the verb 'Get', the resource 'app price schedule', and specifies that it includes 'current and scheduled manual prices' and 'price point IDs'. This differentiates it from sibling tools like asc_list_app_price_points which lists all price points, and asc_set_app_price which sets prices.

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 for retrieving a price schedule but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like asc_list_app_price_points or asc_set_app_price. No guidance on prerequisites or when not to use is provided.

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