List App Price Points

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond that (e.g., 'selectable' implies filtering), but does not disclose pagination behavior or any side effects. With strong annotations, the description's additional value is marginal.

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 concise sentence that covers the essential purpose. It is front-loaded and avoids unnecessary words, earning high marks for conciseness, though it could be slightly more structured with bullet points for clarity.

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 lack of an output schema, the description should explain the return format or what 'selectable' means, but it does not. The tool is simple, but the description omits details like pagination behavior (handled via nextUrl) and any filtering options, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 50%: 'limit' and 'nextUrl' have descriptions, but 'appId' and 'territory' lack any. The description does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Since coverage is exactly 50%, the baseline is 3, and the description adds no extra 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?

The description 'List selectable customer prices and proceeds for an app in one territory' combines a specific verb ('list') with a clear resource ('selectable customer prices and proceeds') and scope ('for an app in one territory'). This precisely distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'asc_get_app_price_schedule' or 'asc_set_app_price'.

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 clearly states what the tool does but provides no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., 'asc_list_apps' or 'asc_get_app_price_schedule'). There is no explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' context, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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