ios_google_services

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

No annotations are provided. The description details the extraction process (parsing specific fields, pattern scanning) but does not mention side effects, permissions, whether the IPA is modified, or limitations such as requiring a decompressed IPA. It provides moderate transparency but has gaps.

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 two sentences: first states the purpose, second details what is extracted. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with key action.

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?

With no output schema, the description should explain the return format. It lists extracted data but does not specify how it is returned (e.g., structure, keys). This is a notable gap. Otherwise, it covers the input and process adequately.

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 100% with one parameter (ipa_path) described as 'Absolute path to the IPA file'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond that, so it meets the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 extracts Google and Firebase configuration from an IPA by parsing GoogleService-Info.plist and scanning other plist and JSON files. It distinguishes itself from siblings like android_google_services (platform-specific) and ios_secrets_scanner (broader scope).

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 description does not explicitly specify when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage for extracting Google services configuration, but lacks guidance on when not to use it or what distinguishes it from similar tools like ios_secrets_scanner.

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