screener_app_ratings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool returns rows with specific fields (ticker, name, date, app_store_score, play_store_score) and that either market or region is required. It does not mention any destructive actions, rate limits, or pagination, but it is adequate for a read-only screener.

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 with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and then gives essential details on outputs and requirements. Every sentence contributes meaningfully.

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 no output schema, the description adequately lists the returned columns. It covers the core functionality and the critical requirement. It could be more complete by explaining the meaning of scores or ordering, but for a simple screener it is sufficient.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by listing return columns and reinforcing the requirement for market or region, but does not significantly expand on the 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?

The description clearly states it 'Screen app ratings across tickers by market or region', with specific returned fields. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'app_ratings_by_ticker' by indicating a broader scope across tickers and requiring market or region.

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 specifies that either market or region is required, giving clear context for usage. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., app_ratings_by_ticker for a single ticker), so guidance is implied but not explicit.

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