native_select_build

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose two useful traits: the selection is 'not active in existing pages' and pages must be verified after launching. However, it omits whether the selection is reversible, what happens to a previously selected bundle, and any permission requirements for this state change.

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 tight sentences with the core action front-loaded and the caveat following immediately. No filler, though the closing clause is slightly cryptic in isolation.

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 state-mutating tool with no annotations, no output schema, and two undocumented required parameters, the description is too thin. It leaves the revision-precondition semantics and the effect on existing selection unaddressed.

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 mentions neither buildId nor expectedRevision, both of which are required. The optimistic-concurrency intent of expectedRevision is left entirely unexplained, and the description does nothing to compensate for the documentation gap.

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 (select) and resource (generated bundle) with the key qualifier 'for the next launch'. This implicitly distinguishes it from native_build and native_launch, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied through the phrase 'for the next launch' and the trailing instruction to verify native page tools afterward. It never states when to prefer this over native_build or native_launch, or what prerequisites must exist before selecting.

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