List app name and subtitle

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description still adds real behavioral context: it returns both the live app info and the in-progress next-version info, and flags which fields are editable. That dual live/edit result shape is not derivable from the annotations or schema.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the field list and closed with the live-vs-edit distinction. No filler and nothing repeated from the title alone.

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 read-only single-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description covers what comes back, in which variants (live and pending version), and editability. The only real gap is the unmentioned appId scoping.

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?

The single required parameter appId has 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it, so nothing explains that the tool is scoped to one app. 'Per language' hints at a locale dimension that does not even appear in the schema, which could mislead.

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?

States a specific verb (show/list) and resource (app-level store details per language) and enumerates the fields returned: name, subtitle, privacy policy and privacy choices URLs. The 'app-level' qualifier implicitly separates it from version-scoped siblings such as asc_list_version_localizations, though no sibling is named.

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?

Usage is only implied: a reader infers you call this to inspect app-level metadata rather than version localizations or app overview. There is no explicit when-to-use, no stated prerequisites, and no named alternative among the many listing siblings.

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