Get beta tester

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds 'detailed information' but does not specify return shape, 404 behavior, or permissions. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond annotations, but does not contradict them.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words. It directly and completely states the tool's purpose in minimal space, which is ideal.

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?

This is a simple read-only operation with one parameter and accurate annotations. The description plus schema is sufficient for most invocation scenarios. However, the absence of an output schema means the description could say a bit more about what 'detailed information' includes, but the tool name and domain conventions make it reasonably inferable.

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 parameter schema fully describes betaTesterId as 'App Store Connect beta tester ID' (100% coverage). The description adds nothing about parameters, so the schema carries the burden. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema coverage is high.

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 ('beta tester'), and the scope ('specific'), effectively distinguishing it from list tools like 'list-beta-testers' that retrieve multiple testers. The verb and object are unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a betaTesterId) or contrast with list-beta-testers for finding IDs. The usage context is only implied by the name and schema.

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