App Store Search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it discloses nothing: no auth/profile requirement, no result count or pagination behavior, no indication of whether the search is local versus remote. 'Search' implies a read-only lookup, but this is inferred, not stated.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero filler or repetition of the title. It is efficient, though its brevity is as much under-specification as conciseness given a five-parameter tool.

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?

An output schema exists and the input schema is fully documented, so the description needn't explain return values or parameters. Still, with zero annotation coverage and no differentiation from sibling store tools, the definition is only minimally sufficient for correct selection.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters including host, port, scheme, and profile. Baseline 3 applies because the description adds no syntax, format, or matching-semantics detail for the required keyword 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('搜索应用在应用商店' = search apps in the app store), so the agent knows the action and target. However, it does nothing to distinguish itself from the many closely-named siblings such as app_store_list, app_store_detail, or app_store_latest_release, leaving the boundary implicit in the word 'search'.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. With siblings like app_store_list and app_store_latest_release present, the agent must guess which store tool applies to its situation.

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