asc_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'List', which implies a read operation, but it does not disclose pagination, filtering, output format, or whether the list is exhaustive. It also does not clarify whether this tool covers both App Store Connect and Developer Portal resources or only one of them, despite the description mentioning both.

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 short sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource. However, it is so terse that it sacrifices useful detail, which is a minor structural issue.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are likely covered there, but the description does not explain the scope of the listing, the meaning of the resource enum, or how this tool relates to the many sibling tools. For a tool with no annotations and a single enum parameter, the description should at least enumerate the resource types or point to the schema. It is minimally adequate but leaves an agent guessing about the tool's exact role.

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 0%, but the single parameter 'resource' has a clear enum that fully defines its allowed values. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema, merely saying 'resources' without mapping to the enum values. Since the enum is self-explanatory and there is only one parameter, 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 states a verb ('List') and a resource ('App Store Connect / Developer Portal resources'), but it is vague about what 'resources' means. The schema's enum clarifies the specific resource types, but the description itself does not enumerate them or distinguish this tool from the many sibling tools that also operate on App Store Connect resources.

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 versus alternatives. Sibling tools like asc_register_bundle_id, asc_enable_capability, asc_register_device, asc_revoke_certificate, and asc_download_profile all relate to App Store Connect resources, but the description does not explain that asc_list is for read-only listing while those are for mutations. An agent must infer usage from the tool name and schema.

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