Get bundle ID

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

Annotations already declare the operation as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond the verb 'Get', which is consistent with annotations. It does not contradict annotations but also provides no additional detail about authentication, rate limits, or response structure.

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 with no unnecessary words. It conveys the essential purpose efficiently and earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and good annotations, but with no output schema the description is vague about what 'detailed information' includes. It could clarify the scope of details returned, making the description somewhat incomplete for an agent relying solely on it.

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 'bundleIdId', which is fully documented as the App Store Connect bundle ID resource ID. The description does not add any further semantic meaning beyond the schema, so the 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 tool gets detailed information about a specific bundle ID, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'list-bundle-ids' by emphasizing 'specific' rather than 'list all'.

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 implied by the description: you use this tool when you need details for a single bundle ID. However, there is no explicit mention of when not to use it or alternatives like 'list-bundle-ids' for multiple IDs, so guidance remains implicit.

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