List Product Page Experiments

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint) already convey safety and idempotency. The description adds no contradictions and provides the context of being tied to an App Store version. However, no additional behavioral details (e.g., rate limits, data freshness) are given.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the main purpose. It is concise without unnecessary words, though it could be slightly expanded without becoming verbose.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not describe the response format, pagination behavior, or that it returns a list. Given the tool's complexity as a paginated list reader, some additional context is warranted.

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 67%, with only limit and nextUrl described. The description clarifies that the tool lists experiments 'for an App Store version,' which helps understand the versionId parameter, but it does not explain limit or nextUrl beyond the schema.

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 action (list), the resource (Product Page Optimization A/B experiments), and the context (for an App Store version). It is specific enough to avoid confusion with create or update siblings, but could more explicitly differentiate from other list tools.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like asc_list_experiment_treatments or asc_create_product_page_experiment. The description lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to information.

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