Search the Apple App Store

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. Description adds that results are 'slim' and lists included fields (id, name, developer, rating, price), which is useful beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. Front-loaded with purpose and action. Every sentence serves a purpose: first defines what it does and what it returns, second directs to alternative for more detail.

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 has 3 parameters, all documented in schema, and output schema exists (as per context signals), the description provides enough context: purpose, return shape, and when to use alternative. A minor gap is that it doesn't mention the country or limit filtering, but those are in schema.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. Description mentions 'by keyword' which aligns with the query parameter but does not add meaning for limit or country beyond what the schema provides.

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 it searches Apple App Store by keyword and returns slim results. It distinguishes from sibling get_app_store_app by noting the latter provides full profiles. Specific verb 'Search' + resource 'Apple App Store apps'.

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?

Explicitly instructs to use get_app_store_app for full profile when needed, guiding when to use this slim version vs the alternative. Could note other siblings like get_app_store_charts for different use cases, but current guidance is clear.

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