List nominations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful context by giving examples of nomination types, but does not mention any additional behavioral traits such as pagination or default filtering behavior beyond what the schema already specifies.

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, information-dense sentence. It includes the primary purpose and clarifying examples without any fluff or repetition of schema details.

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 straightforward listing tool with good annotations and fully described parameters, the description is mostly complete. It does not describe the return format, but since no output schema is present, a brief mention of the returned list would be slightly better; however, the tool's simplicity and the clarity of purpose make this a minor gap.

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%, with each parameter (limit, filter.type, filter.state, filter.relatedApps) having clear descriptions in the schema. The tool description itself adds no parameter-specific semantics, but the schema fully covers parameter meaning, so baseline 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 verb 'List' and the resource 'App Store nominations', with examples ('custom product pages, in-app events') that clarify the resource type. No sibling tool targets nominations, so this distinguishes itself from all other list-* tools.

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 use when you need to retrieve nominations but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusions. The listing context is clear enough for a simple read operation, but there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it.

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