Get phased release

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safe read nature is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: the 404 response when no phased release exists, which is a meaningful edge case for an agent to handle. This qualifies as useful behavioral transparency without redundancy.

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 and highly efficient. The first sentence states the core action, and the second provides the critical edge-case behavior. No redundant information or fluff is present, making it easy for an agent to parse and retain.

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 simple single-parameter getter with no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete: it explains what is returned (the gradual rollout state) and a key edge case (404). While it does not enumerate response fields, this is often unnecessary for a getter, and the annotations cover the operational context. Slight room for improvement would be to explicitly mention the response shape, but the current description is adequate.

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 schema description for appStoreVersionId is already informative ('App Store version ID. Phased release is optional per version.'). The tool description reiterates the optional nature by mentioning 'Returns 404 if version has no phased release,' adding slight context about the parameter's effect on the outcome. However, since schema coverage is 100% and the description does not introduce new parameter meaning, 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 tool's purpose: 'Get phased release for an App Store version (gradual rollout state).' It identifies the specific resource (phased release), the operation (get), and the scope (App Store version), distinguishing it from sibling get/list tools and the create-phased-release tool. The parenthetical '(gradual rollout state)' clarifies the domain concept.

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 clear context for use: it retrieves the phased release for a given App Store version. It also indicates a key behavioral condition: 'Returns 404 if version has no phased release,' which implies that callers should check for this case or use create-phased-release if needed. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of a 5.

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