apex_diff_app

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds that the diff covers pages, regions, and items, but does not elaborate on process, return behavior, or any other behavioral traits beyond this scope.

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, succinct sentence that front-loads the main action ('Compare app structure') and adds a clarifying clause. Every word is purposeful with no redundancy.

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?

For a relatively simple two-parameter diff tool with a full output schema and annotations covering side effects, the description provides enough context about the tool's purpose and scope. It could mention version semantics or time-frame assumptions, but the existing details are mostly complete.

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%, and both parameters (app_id_1, app_id_2) have clear descriptions like 'First application ID (base)'. The tool description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already 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?

Description clearly specifies the verb 'Compare' and the resource 'app structure', and details the diff scope (pages, regions, items). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like apex_describe_page or apex_get_app_details, which focus on single states.

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 implies usage for comparing two app versions but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. There are no exclusionary or conditional statements, leaving usage slightly inferred.

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