google-play-list

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the abstract action, but does not mention pagination, rate limits, data freshness, or the read-only nature. The agent cannot infer important constraints from the description alone.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy. However, it could be slightly expanded to cover key parameters without losing conciseness.

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 presence of many sibling tools and multiple parameters, the description is insufficient. It lacks mention of output format, filtering options, or relationship to other tools. The agent would need extensive schema inspection to use it 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds minimal parameter context. Although 'by category' hints at the category parameter, it does not explain country, language, num, or age. The agent would need to rely solely on schema names and enums, which are not descriptive enough.

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 the verb 'Browse' and the resource 'Google Play Store collections', specifying the types (top free, top paid, grossing) and the dimension 'by category'. This effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like google-play-search (which likely finds specific apps) and google-play-app (which gets details of a single app).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as google-play-search or google-play-app. The description does not mention context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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