List beta app review submissions

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

Annotations already mark this as readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive, covering the safety profile. The description adds minimal behavioral context (e.g., scoping to a build), but does not disclose pagination, response shape, or any operational nuances. It is consistent with annotations, and the extra context is thin but not misleading.

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 redundancy. Every word contributes to clarity, efficiently stating the verb, resource, and scope.

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 the tool's simplicity, the description adequately conveys the core purpose. The schema provides full parameter details, and annotations cover safety. With no output schema, the description could mention what fields are returned, but for a list endpoint this is not a critical gap. The description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 all three parameters, so the schema already explains limit, filter.build, and filter.betaReviewState. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 function: listing TestFlight (beta) app review submissions for a specific build. It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('beta app review submissions') and distinguishes from sibling tools like list-review-submissions (general) and list-beta-app-review-details (details vs submissions).

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 beta review submissions tied to a build, which provides clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives like list-beta-app-review-details or list-review-submissions, nor does it state any exclusions or prerequisites beyond what the schema implies.

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