apple_podcasts_check_access

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: returns no listening data, and provides critical context about token expiry (180 days) and how failures manifest. This goes beyond basic description to help agents diagnose issues.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by usage guidance and return behavior. Every sentence provides value without redundancy. Efficient and well-structured.

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 check tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage timing, return contents, and an important expiration caveat. It is self-contained and sufficient for an agent to 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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds no param details because there are none. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description appropriately clarifies the tool takes no input.

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: verify credentials and list vendor numbers. It uses specific verbs ('verify', 'list') and identifies the resource (Apple Podcasts Connect credentials, access token). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that likely return data summaries or episode lists.

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?

Explicitly instructs when to run: 'Run this first, and run it whenever another tool reports an auth failure'. This provides a clear trigger condition and implies it should precede other tools. Though it doesn't name alternatives, the context of auth failure makes the choice unambiguous.

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