push_to_google_play

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. However, it does not explain the asynchronous nature, whether a job ID is returned, or any potential side effects. The user is left to infer that it enqueues but not what happens next.

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?

Three short sentences, each adding distinct value: purpose, prerequisites, ordering. No redundant phrasing.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (8 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too sparse. It lacks information on return values, parameter details, and how to handle the enqueue process (e.g., polling via wait parameter). Sibling tools exist but are not referenced beyond preview.

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?

Only 2 of 8 parameters have descriptions in the schema. The description mentions 'listing, screenshots, app icon' which hints at includeListing, includeScreenshots, includeAppIcon, but does not explain the rest (locales, displaySlots, skipUnchanged, wait, projectId). This is inadequate for a tool with 8 parameters.

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 enqueues a Google Play push for listing, screenshots, and app icon, and distinguishes it from the sibling preview_google_play_push by requiring that call first.

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 mentions requirements (Premium/Pro, linked app) and the recommended order (call preview first). This provides clear guidance on when and how to use the tool.

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