app_store_version_experiments_v2__get

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context beyond the basic read semantics, such as return format, pagination, or authorization requirements. It does not contradict the annotations but also doesn't enrich them.

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 concise sentence plus the endpoint, front-loading the action and resource. Every word is purposeful with no redundancy or filler.

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 GET-by-ID tool with rich schema descriptions and clear annotations, the description is complete. The absence of an output schema is not an issue since the tool's behavior is straightforward and the parameters are well-documented.

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 (id, include, fields_appStoreVersionExperiments) having a description. The tool description itself does not add any parameter-level semantics, but the schema carries the full burden, so a baseline of 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 action ('Read'), the resource ('App Store version experiments (v2)'), and the scope ('by ID'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list, create, and update by its specific read-by-ID nature.

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 when to use the tool (when you have an ID and need a single experiment), but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios. It lacks a reference to list or other related tools, which would have clarified when this tool is the right choice.

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