expansion_files_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It only states 'Get expansion file metadata', a read operation, but does not disclose whether there are side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or idempotency. Minimal transparency.

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?

A single sentence with no fluff, front-loaded with the key action. However, it is so brief that it may lack necessary detail; a slightly expanded explanation could enhance clarity without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

No output schema, no annotations, and a one-sentence description. It does not explain what 'metadata' entails, the return format, or any prerequisites. For a tool with 4 required parameters and likely a structured response, the description is insufficient for an AI to fully understand usage.

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 coverage is 50% (only packageName and editId have descriptions). The description adds no additional meaning for apkVersionCode or expansionFileType, failing to compensate for the low coverage. The enum on expansionFileType provides some help, but the description itself contributes nothing to parameter understanding.

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?

Description explicitly states 'Get expansion file metadata for a version code', using a specific verb (Get) and resource (expansion file metadata), clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like expansion_files_patch or expansion_files_upload.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description implies it's a read operation, but does not mention when to prefer it over siblings or any prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name.

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