app_store_version_experiments_v2_get_instance

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It says nothing about the operation being a read, what relationships are returned by default, whether the experiment must be in a particular state, or what permissions are needed. A bare HTTP route provides zero behavioral context.

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?

It is short, but the same route is printed twice in parentheses, which is redundancy rather than information. There is no front-loaded statement of purpose; the only content is the endpoint.

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 retrieval tool exposing 8 parameters (relationship inclusion, sparse fields, limits) with no output schema and no annotations, the description is completely inadequate. An agent cannot determine what the response contains or when inclusion parameters are worthwhile.

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%: all 8 parameters, including 'id', include/topic-sparse fields and limit params, are documented in the schema itself. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 text is the HTTP route duplicated verbatim: 'GET /v2/appStoreVersionExperiments/{id}'. It conveys that this is a read of a single app store version experiment and nothing more – there is no statement of what the tool actually does or returns. This is close to tautology, restating the tool name in path form.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus the many sibling retrieval tools (e.g., app_store_version_experiments_get_instance, app_store_version_experiments_v2_treatments_get_to_many_relationship). No prerequisites, no caveats, no alternatives.

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