apex_get_app_details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description aligns by saying 'Get'. The description adds context about the scope (pages, auth, theme) but does not disclose potential edge cases like app existence validation, response size, or performance implications. It adds some value but is not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the purpose and key content areas without any filler. Every word contributes, making it adequately concise and well-structured.

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 simple read-only operation with one parameter and an output schema, the description is largely complete. It identifies the app as 'existing', implies the need for a valid app_id, and mentions the major metadata categories. Minor gaps like error behavior or dependency on a connection are not addressed, but the output schema covers return values.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with app_id described as 'Application ID to inspect.' The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already states. With full schema coverage, the baseline of 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?

The description uses the specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'full metadata for an existing APEX app', explicitly listing components (pages, auth, theme). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like apex_get_page_details, which targets page-level metadata, and apex_list_apps, which lists apps rather than returning app metadata.

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 context: use when you need full app-level metadata. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use it. The distinction from page-level tools is implicit through the phrase 'full metadata for an existing APEX app', but no explicit guidance is provided.

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