app_store_sales

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it explicitly states the operation is read-only, lists required credentials and role permissions, and discloses the no-sales absence behavior. It could go further with rate limits or response shape expectations, but the output schema covers the latter.

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 sentences deliver purpose, prerequisites, and an edge case with zero filler. The most important information is front-loaded in the first sentence, and every sentence earns its place.

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 six-parameter tool with a full output schema, the description covers purpose, authentication, role requirements, read-only behavior, and a notable edge case. It is nearly complete, though it stops short of guiding the agent on when to choose this sibling over other app store tools.

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%, so the schema already documents all six parameters with defaults and formats. The description adds contextual meaning about the report contents, but does not provide parameter-level guidance beyond what the schema already offers.

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 opens with 'Read App Store Sales and Trends' and specifies the exact data granularity ('units downloaded per day per territory per app, summarized by SKU'). This clearly distinguishes it from Play Store and other app store sibling tools, even without naming them.

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 usage context by stating it reads App Store Sales and Trends, and it provides credential prerequisites. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as play_store_stats or app_store_listing, nor does it list any exclusion conditions.

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