Search App Store Review Guidelines

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and a closed world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond that by disclosing the return shape ('matching sections with text excerpts') and the scope of the searchable corpus, though it says nothing about ranking or how pagination behaves.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with what is searched, then what is returned, then when to use it. The parenthetical corpus list earns its place by defining scope, and there is no filler.

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 search with no output schema, the description adequately covers corpus scope and return contents. The only real gaps are pagination behavior and result ordering, which are minor for an agent deciding whether and how to call 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 50% (query and format documented; limit and offset have no descriptions), and the tool description contributes nothing about any parameter. There is no mention that offset enables paging or that limit caps result count, leaving half the parameters explained only by their names and numeric bounds.

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 and resource ('Full-text search across all App Store Review Guidelines sections') and enumerates the corpus (Safety, Performance, Business, Design, Legal), which implicitly contrasts with the singular sibling appstore_guideline_get. It stops short of naming that sibling, so sibling differentiation is inferred rather than explicit.

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?

Gives clear situational context: 'Use before submitting an app or when auditing for policy compliance.' That tells an agent when the tool is relevant, but there is no guidance on when NOT to use it, e.g. to prefer appstore_guideline_get once a specific section is already known.

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