update_listing

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. 'Update' implies mutation, but it does not disclose whether it performs partial or full replacement, permission requirements, or side effects like triggering jobs. The description lacks essential 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?

The description is a single concise sentence, but it is too brief for a tool with 10 parameters. It front-loads the action but omits important details, making it insufficient for proper tool usage.

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 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain parameter optionality, update behavior, or return value. The context signals indicate high complexity, yet the description does not address it.

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 only 10%, yet the description adds minimal parameter meaning. Only 'locale' is hinted at via 'in one language'. The other 9 parameters (appName, keywords, etc.) are not explained or linked to ASO text fields.

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 it updates store listing/ASO text for a project in one language, aligning with the tool name. It implies distinction from siblings like get_listing (read) and push_to_google_play (publishing), but does not explicitly differentiate.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., for multiple languages or bulk updates). It mentions 'in one language' but does not explain constraints or prerequisites.

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