get_app

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys that this is a read-only lookup ('Get full details'), but it does not mention how invalid or unknown slugs are handled, e.g., whether an error is raised or a null result is returned.

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 extremely concise, front-loads the main purpose, and uses a clear Args block for the single parameter. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 simple one-parameter lookup with an output schema, the description covers the core intent adequately. It lacks alternative routing and error-handling context, but these are not critical for a basic getter.

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 schema only provides the parameter title 'Slug' with no description. The description adds meaningful semantics by stating that slug is 'The app's unique identifier', which compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 action ('Get full details') and the resource ('a specific app'), with the input identifier ('by its slug'). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling retrieval tools like get_tool or search_apps, so it misses the full top score.

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 phrase 'by its slug' implies that the agent should use this tool when it already has an app slug and needs full details. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when not to use it or when to prefer an alternative such as search_apps or get_tool.

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