appstore_reviews

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'Get reviews' and offers no information on pagination (page 1-10), sorting options (recent/helpful), country filtering, return format, or rate limits. It does not mislead but provides almost no transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy, which is efficient. It loses a point because the brevity borders on under-specification for a tool with multiple parameters.

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 five parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain how reviews are returned, the meaning of pagination and sorting, or which app identifier to use. The description leaves critical invocation details unspecified.

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 60%, and the tool description adds nothing about parameters. The relationship between 'id' (numeric app ID) and 'appId' (bundle ID) is ambiguous, and 'country' lacks a schema description. The description fails to clarify these ambiguities.

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 states it retrieves reviews of an app from the Apple App Store, a specific verb and resource. This clearly distinguishes it from the Google Play sibling tools (e.g., gplay_reviews) by platform, so the purpose is unambiguous.

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 platform (Apple App Store) is explicitly identified, making the intended context clear versus Google Play alternatives. However, there is no explicit 'use when' or 'don't use when' guidance or mention of alternative tools, so it stops short of a full 5.

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