get_app_store_state

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It fails to disclose whether the operation is read-only, what happens if the version_id is invalid, or any permission requirements. The description is minimal and lacks behavioral context beyond stating what is retrieved.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that is efficient and free of fluff. Every word contributes to the purpose.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description provides example state values, partially compensating for the lack of return value documentation. It is fairly complete for a simple getter, though it could list all possible states.

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% for the single parameter (version_id), with a clear description. The tool description does not add meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score 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 clearly states the action (Get), the resource (App Store state of a version), and provides concrete examples of state values (PREPARE_FOR_SUBMISSION, IN_REVIEW, READY_FOR_SALE). This differentiates it from sibling tools like get_app_versions (which lists versions) and get_review (which gets review details).

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 the tool is for checking the current state of a version, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., get_review or get_build). No guidance on prerequisites, context, or exclusions is provided.

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