App Update

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden; it does disclose that this is a write operation and that dry_run only previews, which is genuinely useful. But it omits permissions/auth needs, reversibility, and what happens to a running app, leaving material behavioral gaps for an 11-param mutation tool.

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 terse clauses, front-loading the write-operation nature and the dry-run caveat with zero wasted words.

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, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers purpose plus the important dry-run behavior. It is nearly sufficient, though it could say more about side effects given the absence of annotations.

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 73%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds semantics for dry_run (仅预演), which the schema leaves as a bare boolean, but contributes nothing for the remaining ten params. Baseline 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?

States a specific verb (升级/upgrade), resource (应用/app), and target (指定版本/specified version), and flags the mutation nature with 写操作. It distinguishes itself well from app_install and app_check_update by name/verb, though it doesn't explicitly call out those siblings.

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 dry_run=True clause gives a concrete preview recipe, which is real usage guidance. However, there is no explicit when/when-not versus siblings like app_install or app_check_update, so usage context is only implied.

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