Set Version Build

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds detail that the tool modifies the build relationship and includes error conditions (build not valid/processed, version not editable), which go beyond the annotations without contradiction.

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 concise with a single purpose sentence followed by structured sections for Args, Returns, and Error Handling. Every part is informative and necessary, with no redundant 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 tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description covers purpose, arguments, return format, and error handling completely. It provides all necessary context for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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% and the schema descriptions already cover both parameters. The 'Args' section in the description merely restates what the schema provides without adding new meaning, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Attach' and clearly identifies the resource as a build to an App Store version's build relationship. It distinguishes from siblings like 'asc_create_app_store_version' by noting it is required before submission for review.

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 states 'This is required before the version can be submitted for review,' providing clear context for when to use the tool. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance but implies the version must be in an editable state through error handling.

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